why no special missions?

[ClaudeSpeed1911]

Its true they don't need to add everything but they don't need to dump down stuff from the prequels.

Compare this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEDErI-XphU

To this:

 

 

GTAV doesn't have good sound effects, the reactions are more robotic etc...

[XenoxX]

Its true they don't need to add everything but they don't need to dump down stuff from the prequels.

Compare this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEDErI-XphU

To this:

 

 

GTAV doesn't have good sound effects, the reactions are more robotic etc...

That is essentially because GTA Vs shooting mechanics are not focused on interiors, in GTA V exteriour run and gun gameplay is the focus, and the cover mechanics accompanies that.

Those shootouts are way better than IVs static cover shootouts.

[ClaudeSpeed1911]

So you are telling me that interiors are the reason they dumped down sound effects?

[XenoxX]

So you are telling me that interiors are the reason they dumped down sound effects?

No thats not what I meant, I mean that the comparison between the shootouts you forwarded is not fair because GTA V focuses on a different type of game-style, run and gun.

 

Regarding the sound effects you may be right(eventhough I hear no noticeable difference in quality but I was never good with sounds), but GTA V compensates that with a huge arsenal of weapons which all can be customized according to your needs.

[ULPaperContact]

 

So you are telling me that interiors are the reason they dumped down sound effects?

No thats not what I meant, I mean that the comparison between the shootouts you forwarded is not fair because GTA V focuses on a different type of game-style, run and gun.

 

Regarding the sound effects you may be right(eventhough I hear no noticeable difference in quality but I was never good with sounds), but GTA V compensates that with a huge arsenal of weapons which all can be customized according to your needs.

 

 

"Focuses on a different type of game-style, run and gun."

 

 

My ass. GTA is about shooting things, whether that be standing still on a rooftop, or in a building, or running around in the street. That is no excuse.

[ClaudeSpeed1911]

Although the run and gun is smoother in V (as with all the movment) IV is much more better for running and guning because the cops are not terminators.

 

And that huge arsenal isn't an excuse when every fire arm feels the same.

[XenoxX]

Although the run and gun is smoother in V (as with all the movment) IV is much more better for running and guning because the cops are not terminators.

 

And that huge arsenal isn't an excuse when every fire arm feels the same.

Are you implieng that IV is better for running and gunning than V? Because I distinctly disagree, eventhough the cops have a reltively high accuracy one can utilize cover and running and gunning easily in a cop shootout, whether in missions or natural free roam gameplay.

 

And some of the weapons feel and play very different especially in the first person mode which also introduces a little bit of recoil btw.

In addition to that you still have customization of weapons, with extended magazines, colors and scopes.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

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.

I'm sorry, but I in fact did debunk his argument. You mat not agree, but it's the truth.

 

The LA Noire face capture is one example, he presented it as a superior option and asked if it should be in V due to previously appearing in LA Noire, though I correctly stated it to be a preference option as it has limitations that hand animation does not, and vice versa. A true superior option would have all the previous ability plus more.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Cheatz_N_Trickz

[ClaudeSpeed1911]

Yes it is better, you can't last a minute if you don't take cover. Try playing V without taking cover and you will see what I mean.

 

As for the weapons, they are still not that different withh or without mods, scopes for example doessn't provide any thing different.

[XenoxX]

 

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.

I'm sorry, but I in fact did debunk his argument. You mat not agree, but is the truth. The LA Noire face capture is one example, he presented it as a superior option and asked if that should be in V due to previously appearing in LA Noire, though I correctly stated it to be a preference option as it has limitations that hand animation does not, and vice versa. A true superior option would have all the previous ability plus more.

 

Ahem, but that is in fact true, LA Noires face capture is objectively a superior option, it is highly superior to handmade animations.

Rockstar even said so themselfs, and they also explained WHY they wouldn't have it in an interview with Dan Houser.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

Ahem, but that is in fact true, LA Noires face capture is objectively a superior option, it is highly superior to handmade animations.

Rockstar even said so themselfs, and they also explained WHY they wouldn't have it in an interview with Dan Houser.

 

Not true. The LA Noire tech requires the actors' full likeness, so if I wanted an original looking character, it cannot be used, therefore hand animation would be the better choice. You are wrong here.

 

Edit: ChirroVitte and XenoxX totally stumped I see!

Edited January 6, 2016 by Cheatz_N_Trickz

[ChiroVette]

 

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.

I'm sorry, but I in fact did debunk his argument. You mat not agree, but it's the truth.

 

The LA Noire face capture is one example, he presented it as a superior option and asked if it should be in V due to previously appearing in LA Noire, though I correctly stated it to be a preference option as it has limitations that hand animation does not, and vice versa. A true superior option would have all the previous ability plus more.

 

 

I don't agree. The reason is because whether you choose to accept it or not, you are still arguing by virtue of your own opinion, and last time I checked opinions cannot debunk one another. This is not a debate about empirically measurable phenomenon. You believing something is unsatisfying doesn't make it so. You not accepting his assertion that GTA V is so varied it doesn't have to be as good in every single facet is not the same as his opinion being wrong.

 

Look, you want to argue creation versus evolution and talk about science and observable, measurable laws of physics and biology, fine. You want to debate about the first and second law of thermodynamics or Relativity or Boyle's law, and you want to use scientific research and citations from published studies to debunk my positions on those topics, then great.

 

Sorry, but debating what is better or worse, satisfying or unsatisfying, improvements or not, and what is enjoyable and not enjoyable are simply NOT empirical arguments, nor should anyone ever have to defend their tastes.

 

So, no, you didn't debunk anything. You simply offered your own opinion about the topic.

Edited January 6, 2016 by ChiroVette

[Cheatz/Trickz]

I don't agree.

 

Mate, it doesn't matter if you agree or not, I don't expect you to. I still debunked XenoxX, end of story.

 

But for the sake of it: If you say I'm stating opinion, you're also saying XenoxX is merely stating opinion, so you're ruling out his argument as well. But he'll still like your posts lol.

[XenoxX]

 

I don't agree.

 

Mate, it doesn't matter if you agree or not, I don't expect you to. I still debunked XenoxX, end of story.

 

But for the sake of it: If you say I'm stating opinion, you're also saying XenoxX is merely stating opinion, so you're ruling out his argument as well. But he'll still like your posts lol.

 

The point is that no opinion debunked the other, both opinions can exist as exactly what they are, opinions, not facts.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

The point is that no opinion debunked the other, both opinions can exist as exactly what they are, opinions, not facts.

 

Hey, you didn't reply to my point in the thread about examples of V that don't work as intended. I was eager to hear your response to this, but I think I totally stumped you on it. You can't defend bad design (it's the "are you cautious....future R* games" thread)

[ChiroVette]

 

I don't agree.

 

Mate, it doesn't matter if you agree or not, I don't expect you to. I still debunked XenoxX, end of story.

 

But for the sake of it: If you say I'm stating opinion, you're also saying XenoxX is merely stating opinion, so you're ruling out his argument as well. But he'll still like your posts lol.

 

 

I don't think you are getting my point at all.

 

But I will answer your second question first: In terms of empiricism and objectivity, YES, I am ruling out his opinion, too. Even though I agree with him, I am ruling out MY OPINION, as well!

 

Why?

 

Because when two people have different opinions, absent clearly delineated, empirical evidence, neither opinion can objectively be said to be correct or incorrect. In other words, the opinions you stated that supposedly debunked his opinions did not debunk anything. Because without measurable proof, one opinion is just as valid as the other. Yours and his. By the way, if XxenoxX had claimed he debunked your opinion, I would be arguing with him now, not you! lol

 

One opinion cannot debunk another opinion. It simply doesn't work like that. Because opinions are simply not subject to the same burden of empirical proof that scientific research is burdened by.

Edited January 6, 2016 by ChiroVette

[Cheatz/Trickz]

You're confused Chiro, I didn't debunk an opinion of his, I debunked what he said was an "objectively superior" option, his words. I merely equalled the two options via pros and cons of both.

 

Now do you still agree with him? His use of objectivity voids your ability to "agree" with him, since what you think to be his opinion, he actually presented as a fact.

 

Oooohh.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Cheatz_N_Trickz

[ULPaperContact]

What does any of this have to do with R3 missions?

[ChiroVette]

You're confused Chiro, I didn't debunk an opinion of his, I debunked what he said was an "objectively superior" option, his words.

 

I didn't catch any of that. I don't recall him ever saying that his opinion was objectively superior. If I did, then I would have agreed with you and would probably be arguing with him right now.

 

To be fair, can you please point me to where he said this? Because I missed it in his original post, and if he said that, then you are 100% correct.

 

 

Edit: Cheatz, are you talking about his post here?

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

Because this is the post you claim to have debunked, yet I only see him expressing his opinion, not claiming he has objectively proved anything.

Edited January 6, 2016 by ChiroVette

[Cheatz/Trickz]

To be fair, can you please point me to where he said this? Because I missed it in his original post, and if he said that, then you are 100% correct.

No, this one:

 

Ahem, but that is in fact true, LA Noires face capture is objectively a superior option, it is highly superior to handmade animations.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Cheatz_N_Trickz

[ChiroVette]

Okay, while you are correct about that post, and by the way, for the record, I did miss that lol, that still happened after you and I started to discuss this whole issue of you "debunking" his position.

 

Sooooooo for the sake of, at best meeting of the minds and at worst agreeing to disagree, can we at least say that he was in error saying that LA Noire's face capture is objectively superior and you were in error saying that you debunked his original post a page or two back?

 

By the way, with regard to LA Noir, in fairness, I really can't even offer an opinion about his or your statements about the game because I never played it.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

Actually no, because the "debunking" issue started earlier but the subject was the exact same (LA Noire tech, MP3 and RDR having the better versions of what V has).

 

It was a case of fact from the start. The LA tech isn't better nor worse, MP3 does have cover reactions which are obviously better than V's static animation, and RDR has weapon balance that V doesn't have, which we already agree is bad in V (cycling through too many weapons due to carrying them all, obsoleteness etc).

[XenoxX]

Actually no, because the "debunking" issue started earlier but the subject was the exact same (LA Noire tech, MP3 and RDR having the better versions of what V has).

 

It was a case of fact from the start. The LA tech isn't better nor worse, MP3 does have cover reactions which are obviously better than V's static animation, and RDR has weapon balance that V doesn't have, which we already agree is bad in V (cycling through too many weapons due to carrying them all, obsoleteness etc).

Let me reiterate my opinion,

My point is that V is not in need of this high focus on such features since its a game which has too many mechanics to properly master one mechanic, however in my opinion Vs weapon and cover system is overall better than IVs due to weapon variety, customization, improved third person mechanics and responsiveness through controller input.

 

The above said cannot be "debunked" its simply my opinion which does not apply with yours.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

 

I prefer realistic side missions that the character would actually do, so in the 3D era I never did the vehicle side missions, never found them fun, too arcadey and make no sense in the story.

But IV's Vigilante missions were implemented perfectly, the car thefts, Jacob's drug drops, Roman Taxi missions, Brucie's races, all fit perfectly. And then the episodes added their own which again fit the story.

In V, I really wished there were more Assassination missions, that's another thing IV did better with the Fixer. And property missions are pathetic. R* must have given up after finishing Franklin's taxi jobs, it doesn't explain why he would even buy the place.

That's one of the things I enjoyed with the shift to the HD era. Niko had a reason to be driving taxis to help out Roman, he had a reason to deliver drugs/engage in drug deals for LJ etc. I personally found this way more immersive than CJ randomly working as a valet or in a quarry for example.

 

Hell even the tow truck missions in GTA V (though boring IMO) have some substance behind them. Speaking of assassinations I would've loved to have seen more and I think Michael should've been able to do them too.

And that's why I never liked Vigilante in IV, I felt as if I was killing random gang members for absolute no reason and pointless killing breaks immersion for me.

 

 

Fair enough. I didn't find them immersion breaking seeing as Niko spends the majority of the game as a hired gun, but that's just me.

 

 

 

 

 

I prefer realistic side missions that the character would actually do, so in the 3D era I never did the vehicle side missions, never found them fun, too arcadey and make no sense in the story.

But IV's Vigilante missions were implemented perfectly, the car thefts, Jacob's drug drops, Roman Taxi missions, Brucie's races, all fit perfectly. And then the episodes added their own which again fit the story.

In V, I really wished there were more Assassination missions, that's another thing IV did better with the Fixer. And property missions are pathetic. R* must have given up after finishing Franklin's taxi jobs, it doesn't explain why he would even buy the place.

That's one of the things I enjoyed with the shift to the HD era. Niko had a reason to be driving taxis to help out Roman, he had a reason to deliver drugs/engage in drug deals for LJ etc. I personally found this way more immersive than CJ randomly working as a valet or in a quarry for example.

 

Hell even the tow truck missions in GTA V (though boring IMO) have some substance behind them. Speaking of assassinations I would've loved to have seen more and I think Michael should've been able to do them too.

And that's why I never liked Vigilante in IV, I felt as if I was killing random gang members for absolute no reason and pointless killing breaks immersion for me.

CJ doesn't give away any such false impression of wanted to "escape from the life of violence yet he ends up doing the same". If anything it breaks the immersion more in IV, like you rightly said.

 

 

 

You can't be serious right? CJ runs away from LS and spends the next 5 years in LC only to come back to the same sh*t he ran away from in the first place. Niko and CJ do share something in common however that they're both "forced" into a life of violence again.

 

For Niko it's Roman's gambling debts and doing anything to keep them alive and for CJ it's C.R.A.S.H grabbing him by the balls. CJ doesn't give any sort of impression he wants to be doing what he does. He often comes across as reluctant (like Niko does).

Edited January 7, 2016 by SonOfLiberty

[ChiroVette]

Actually no, because the "debunking" issue started earlier but the subject was the exact same (LA Noire tech, MP3 and RDR having the better versions of what V has).

 

 

 

But you still didn't debunk anything. Like you said, our discussion started before the LA Noir quote from XxenoxX. So you were expressing your opinion about the games and claiming to have debunked his opinion with yours.

 

In truth, one opinion based on tastes cannot debunk another opinion based on tastes. It doesn't work that way, because, as I said, you are offering no empirical proof with which to claim to have debunked anything. Nor would I expect proof to back up your opinion.

 

I also disagree about cycling through too many weapons in V. I LOVE that about the game and have always wanted a GTA game to allow that, but have never seen one that did until now. So I am more than happy to have as many weapons in my wheel as Rockstar wants to stick in the game.

 

Again, that is opinion (yours and mine) not fact, and certainly neither of us have "debunked" anything. We have only expressed our opinion.

[Osho]

What does any of this have to do with R3 missions?

Unfortunately, ChiroWALLe ( Because he likes to write wall of texts ), has this habit of writing long paragraphs by dragging it out with things that have little to no relevance for the topic, but more so, the concerned person in the form of either loud renaeks about why certain person sucks, mixed with insults and some doses of his personal recommendations of how to behave in a debate, and so on. It becomes annoying when wall of texts emerge for getting a simple point across, too.

The more he writes the more he contradicts himself on quite many occassions, and derails the whole argument by shifting the attention to something else and never countering to the actual argument, which makes it difficult to discuss.

If you see all my posts to this topic, they're all targeted towards the subject, not specific individual. Until and unless, the said individual forces his opinion on others by derailing the talks.

Anyways,

OT:

SonOfLiberty - Yeah. Maybe you're right. I always saw CJ as a gangster first and foremost who never wanted to leave the life of crime since that's what he did even in LC but on its own and different from the life of being a gangster. But still involved in small time crimes in LC.

So, I think CJ always had the intention to do something big but he was very much involved in the life of crime, until late in the story, where he finally gets rid of all the challenges he had to face in order to win back Grove Street. Still, if you haven't taken all the territories, CJ can still fight to expand theGS, which tells me that he is now working as a kingpin or a boss across SA, but nowhere I think, its made clear that he no longer has any involvement in any form of crime activities.

Its upto the players to interpret.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

What does any of this have to do with R3 missions?

SonOfLiberty - Yeah. Maybe you're right. I always saw CJ as a gangster first and foremost who never wanted to leave the life of crime since that's what he did even in LC but on its own and different from the life of being a gangster. But still involved in small time crimes in LC.

So, I think CJ always had the intention to do something big but he was very much involved in the life of crime, until late in the story, where he finally gets rid of all the challenges he had to face in order to win back Grove Street. Still, if you haven't taken all the territories, CJ can still fight to expand theGS, which tells me that he is now working as a kingpin or a boss across SA, but nowhere I think, its made clear that he no longer has any involvement in any form of crime activities.

Its upto the players to interpret.

 

 

To be fair he's really not as adamant as Niko, but I've always felt like CJ was a victim of circumstance similarly nonetheless. Anyway that's getting a bit off topic...

 

I've seen a few people say that things don't need to make sense because it's just a video game, but where do we draw the line? If that's the case there should be a side mission where we get to fly around LS on a unicorn with rockets shooting rainbows out of its mouth killing peds, but it's just a video game. Who cares about "sense" right? And to me that where the problem is.

 

I can perfectly understand the grievances with things being taken out (I have them too), but on the other hand I can understand R*'s logic getting things to "fit". In general the HD era is less cartoonish and whacky than the 3D era and this is pretty much reflected in most of the side missions/activities..

 

Like I said before I enjoyed the shift to the HD era where R* put more thought into the side missions as they complement Niko's actual personality and what drives him. It's a lot more intrinsic to me than most of the "odd jobs" from the 3D era that just felt like they were there for the sake of being there.

 

In saying that I don't agree with R*'s mindset of taking things away without anything being put in its place as an alternative. To be fair GTA IV is hardly innocent in this regard either, but I feel GTA V is a bigger culprit.

 

Sometimes it makes the effort like for example the game doesn't have Most Wanted missions, but in its place it has Bounty Hunts which is fine however it has Franklin as a repo man early on yet it offers no repo side missions to fill the void for the absent import/export missions from the older games.

 

It's all a bit haphazard to me.

Edited January 7, 2016 by SonOfLiberty

[Osho]

02 I've seen a few people say that things don't need to makes sense because it's just a video game, but where do we draw the line?

The point was that certain activities may possibly make little to no direct sense relating to the narrative and / or the protagonist, but to draw the line here, every activity should make direct sense trelating to the theme ( formula ) of the series.

To get my point across, I gave a very simple and easy example:

Yoga vs Vehicle based missions!

Now, Vehicle based missions could easily be varied and interesting on its own for the sandbox potential GTA Offers, and instead of removing them just because it makes little to no sense or the context, would be a very unfair thing to do.

I don't understand why people treat the potential outside the story so lightly and give not enough care and thought about evolving the sandbox potential instead of only thinking about the narratove and storytelling all the time.

If one wants everything should come in the game with some sort of believability or context then its not a tough thing to do.

Just like bowling, yoga, etc got their introductory moments in order to give some "sense" or "meaning" for being there...and not "just there" for the sake of it... can be easily looked upon and should be focused in future as a solution to give more depth and reasons for the player to interest him in doing something.

This criticism can be easily handled so its not a big issue. I even addressed this in one of my earlier post as a recommendation for R* to focus on making such kind of missions or activity acceptable in HD era as well.

I am actually glad you brought this question up. It should have been raused earlier but unfortunately ChiroVette totally derailed the discussions from that point onwards to satisfy his own ego and personal bickering.

[ChiroVette]

SonOfLiberty, I think you may be right about CJ being somewhat of a victim of circumstance. I have always really loved his backstory and wish there was more of it for the time he spent in Liberty City. In San Andreas, all we know is that he was flying into Los Santos from Liberty for his Mom's funeral, he worked for Salvatore's son Joey, and he goes back to St Mark's Bistro to take out a crapload of Forelli Brothers. But CJ's story I always really enjoyed.

 

I would definitely not be opposed to seeing R3 type missions and special vehicle missions make a return in future games. Even if they were more story-driven. Volition did some interesting things with Taxi, Paramedic, and Vigilante-type missions in Saints Row 2. The Paramedic missions, in particular, were interesting because unlike 3D GTA games, where you simply picked up patients, dropped them off at the hospital, and then picked up some more patients, in SR2, you had to exit the ambulance and were assigned random CPR tasks. On some patients, you needed to use paddles on a defibrillator, sometimes chest compressions, etc. Volition did a great job with the "jobs" in SR2, which were just a variation on GTA's R3 missions. I could definitely see Rockstar bringing back these types of missions, even if they aren't necessarily initiated or cancelled with R3. I think with SR2 it's up on the D-Pad, but I forget off hand.

 

 

 

What does any of this have to do with R3 missions?

Unfortunately, ChiroWALLe ( Because he likes to write wall of texts ), has this habit of writing long paragraphs by dragging it out with things that have little to no relevance for the topic, but more so, the concerned person in the form of either loud renaeks about why certain person sucks, mixed with insults and some doses of his personal recommendations of how to behave in a debate, and so on. It becomes annoying when wall of texts emerge for getting a simple point across, too.
The more he writes the more he contradicts himself on quite many occassions, and derails the whole argument by shifting the attention to something else and never countering to the actual argument, which makes it difficult to discuss.
If you see all my posts to this topic, they're all targeted towards the subject, not specific individual. Until and unless, the said individual forces his opinion on others by derailing the talks.
Anyways

 

Actually all my posts are not only relevant, but offer articulated commentary which stimulate discussion and intelligent discourse.

 

You complain about my "Walls of text" but the hypocrisy inherent in your accusations are that your own walls are incomprehensible babble, double-talk, and you NEVER back up any of your accusations. All you do is toss out the same things over and over again, which is nothing but unwarranted pejoratives without ANY fact behind them. You have never once demonstrated your position against my posts, you only toss out drivel in a transparent attempt to "win" without even making an actual case. You are the perfect example of a guy who thinks that you "saying something" means its true regardless of any intrinsic facts behind your empty ramblings. All you can do is keep saying the same thing, over and over again, with no support, foundation, or proof.

 

By the way, unlike you, at least my walls of text are separated into cohesive, intelligible paragraphs and sentences. Your "walls" are just vomited out, random thoughts in BLOCKS that are as clumsy and without being spaced or structured. We may both write big posts, but at least I have something intelligent and reasonable to say. You seem to leave reason at the door whenever you enter the forum.

Edited January 7, 2016 by ChiroVette

[Algonquin Assassin]

That's a great point about SR2. I really enjoyed the paramedic missions and whatnot in SR2 because Volition actually made them interesting unlike the 3D era equivalents.

 

The problem for me atleast was they never really evolved. From GTA III to VCS they remained fairly stagnant so I really wasn't heart broken when they weren't included in GTA IV.

 

However despite that those odd job kind of side missions aren't really my thing if R* could make them interesting like Volition I wouldn't have an issue with them coming back.