why no special missions?

[ChiroVette]

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.

 

You know, I don't even mind the lack of evolution of the R3 missions in the games, per se, because Rockstar seemed to have their hands full evolving so many other facets of the games. When you go from III to VC, sure the PAramedic missions didn't change, but look how huge the gameplay evolved in almost every other areas from the myriad of properties, businesses, flyables, 100% completion rewards, side missions, and on and on. I kind of like the way that Rockstar left paramedic, Fire, and Vigilante missions a little static going from VC to SA, because it was like a little bit of nostalgia.

 

The reason I referenced SR2 is not saying Rockstar should have gone that route, but showing that they could easily bring back these types of missions without making them nothing but fan-service-nostalgia. Knowing Rockstar, they can totally breathe new life into R3-type missions and special vehicle missions if they wanted to.

[Ma-mothers-Ma-Sister]

Because it's not realistic. Only people stuck in 2001 would want these unrealistic repetitive side missions that was never cool. Infact only a reject would want that. And an Inbred at that. I'm glad they took those sh*t missions on because IV and V are better games in terms of quality and don't give me that shark card BS because you don't have to buy them and plus it's helping r* make a sh*t load of money to put towards their future games

[BobFromReboot]

Because it's not realistic. Only people stuck in 2001 would want these unrealistic repetitive side missions that was never cool. Infact only a reject would want that. And an Inbred at that. I'm glad they took those sh*t missions on because IV and V are better games in terms of quality and don't give me that shark card BS because you don't have to buy them and plus it's helping r* make a sh*t load of money to put towards their future games

 

But getting busted and let out the next day for murdering somebody is realistic? GTA is not about 100% realism, it's about having fun in a realistic setting. There are f*cking UFO's in this game.

Edited January 7, 2016 by BobFromReboot

[ChiroVette]

Because it's not realistic. Only people stuck in 2001 would want these unrealistic repetitive side missions that was never cool. Infact only a reject would want that. And an Inbred at that. I'm glad they took those sh*t missions on because IV and V are better games in terms of quality and don't give me that shark card BS because you don't have to buy them and plus it's helping r* make a sh*t load of money to put towards their future games

 

Obviously I disagree with you on all of this, and while we're on the subject, why are you being so insulting toward people collectively who like something you don't?

[B Dawg]

Because it's not realistic. Only people stuck in 2001 would want these unrealistic repetitive side missions that was never cool. Infact only a reject would want that. And an Inbred at that. I'm glad they took those sh*t missions on because IV and V are better games in terms of quality and don't give me that shark card BS because you don't have to buy them and plus it's helping r* make a sh*t load of money to put towards their future games

Then GTA is not the game for you.

[PhillBellic]

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.

How were the Paramedic Missions handled in Saints Row 2?

[Osho]

 

 

Only people stuck in 2001 would want these unrealistic repetitive side missions that was never cool. Infact only a reject would want that. And an Inbred at that

Your post is so upsetting to read but I will try to keep my cool.

Why don't you think that there's always a scope for improvement instead of scrapping them entirely?

Like the vigilante saw changes in IV to make them more acceptable for the realistic games like IV.

In my opinion, IV and V are more unrealistic in number of ways as well. But I would want to refrain from having a debate over it.

I'm glad they took those sh*t missions on because IV and V are better games in terms of quality

Much more boring as well because there's hardly anything interesting to do.

[Grumpy Cat]

all haters of R3 missions, go f*ck your self and go collect all letter scraps, spaceships parts and under water junks without using help of internet.

if you rather do it than R3 missions

[ChiroVette]

 

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.

How were the Paramedic Missions handled in Saints Row 2?

 

 

In SR2, while in an ambulance, when you initiate the Paramedic missions you had 10 levels or it may have also be 12, I forget.

 

So instead of having a 3 seat ambulance where you pick up one patient at a time and drive between 1 and 3 to the hospital like in GTA, in SR2, you are called to an accident scene. There are then between 1 and 4 patients lying on the ground of the bloody scene, depending on what level you are on. Once at the scene, you get out of the ambulance and tend to one patient at a time. Depending on the instructions once you get to each patient, either you administer CPR, shock paddles to start a heart, etc. When you finish one patient, you go to the next until you are done with the scene. At the higher levels you will have several accident scenes you need to get to. I believe each level has one more patient in total for the level.

 

Its an interesting take on the motif.

[Osho]

Volition has introduced a lot better ideas to many things in both SR 1 and 2.

Don't know how many years R* going to take to think something interesting or fresh before they become history and thrown out of the top spot.

[XenoxX]

Volition has introduced a lot better ideas to many things in both SR 1 and 2.

Don't know how many years R* going to take to think something interesting or fresh before they become history and thrown out of the top spot.

As of now volition got "thrown out of the top spot".

Its clear which developer made the right decisions to apeal to the right people...

[Osho]

I am not implying Volition is / was at the top spot ( read carefully ). I am calling out on Rockstar to use their 1000 people workforce and multiple studios for something that doesn't make me go through the embarrassment and shame while playing their games every four or five years, and watching other developers with their limited workforce and budget manage to give a much better gaming experience.

[ChiroVette]

Volition has introduced a lot better ideas to many things in both SR 1 and 2.

 

 

Volition has come up with some very interesting ideas, I give them a ton of credit, and I LOVE all the SR games.

 

However, it is important to remember that if it were not for Rockstar and GTA, Volition would never have had such an already well established, rich template to draw from and add to. Additionally, you keep hawking some variation of the same line, which is in your post I quoted:

 

 

 

Don't know how many years R* going to take to think something interesting or fresh before they become history and thrown out of the top spot.

 

This is the very same myopic view you keep regurgitating ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

 

Yes, Volition has GREAT ideas and is very good at what they do. So is Avalanche, by the way, with the parachute + grapple and thrusters in Just Cause 2. But just because some people expand on some facets of GTA's rich game motifs does NOT mean that GTA is going stale. This is your problem and the difference between you and I.

 

I see the way Volition handled things like Stronghold Takeovers, Special Vehicle missions (lol like the Septic truck!), gang and police notoriety levels instead of just typical wanted levels, and I say cool! Great job. Different than GTA, better in some ways, but GTA still has a ton of stuff SR doesn't. So I get to enjoy both!!

 

You take a few things other people did, while copying Rockstar's formula, by the way, and you deceptively intimate that all the other awesome things that Rockstar does with GTA are unimportant. GTA is nowhere close to being stale. There are so many awesome, fresh ideas in V that you are closed completely off to (while bizarrely enough you keep playing V online!!) so you ignore all that and focus on the one or two things that aren't in the game you want.

 

 

 

Volition has introduced a lot better ideas to many things in both SR 1 and 2.

Don't know how many years R* going to take to think something interesting or fresh before they become history and thrown out of the top spot.

As of now volition got "thrown out of the top spot".

Its clear which developer made the right decisions to apeal to the right people...

 

 

Volition was never in the top spot. They have never been a true competitor to Rockstar in this arena. But the good news is, they don't have to be. They have carved out a nice little sandbox niche for themselves without trying to truly challenge GTA.

Edited January 8, 2016 by ChiroVette

[Osho]

Copying Rockstar formula?

Someone surely didn't play 'Kingpin life of Crime'.

Not everything is original about GTA. I don't have the list right now but if I can come up through search then there are many things that Rockstar seems to have been influenced from other games.

Though, Rockstar games are unique as well with decent amount of good things.

But my concern is about the future, after enjoying their amazing GTA 2 and 3D era games.

Right now they are average at best.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

Saints Row has a lot of activities and craziness but the games are very arcadey, they look and play very much like budget games.

[ChiroVette]

Copying Rockstar formula?

Someone surely didn't play 'Kingpin life of Crime'.

Not everything is original about GTA. I don't have the list right now but if I can come up through search then there are many things that Rockstar seems to have been influenced from other games.

Though, Rockstar games are unique as well with decent amount of good things.

But my concern is about the future, after enjoying their amazing GTA 2 and 3D era games.

Right now they are average at best.

 

I never said EVERYONE copied GTA. But clearly the original SR games, particularly 1 and 2 paid serious homage to GTA. Anyone can see that. And by the way, this is NOT an insult. What's wrong with copying some elements from the best of the best, which in this arena has been Rockstar for over 15 years?

 

Your "concern" has been noted over and over again. It is one that I obviously do not share. Also lucky, Rockstar and I believe MOST GTA fans don't share it as well. So hopefully GTA VI will be an awesome sequel to V.

 

 

Saints Row has a lot of activities and craziness but the games are very arcadey, they look and play very much like budget games.

 

 

I wouldn't argue with this. But what's wrong with budget games if that's the best a company like Volition can do? And by the way, they aren't really "budget gammes" in the real sense of the word. They are only budget compared to Rockstar's huge dev team productions. But then again, most devs are. So this is fine by me.

 

By the way you say "Arcadey" as if this is a bad thing. I love the arcadey feel of SR games. They are fun as hell.

Edited January 8, 2016 by ChiroVette

[Osho]

Those so many awesome, fresh ideas in V really are not "so many" otherwise why would such threads exist. I don't understand. Do people even realize how much the past games offered and how much of the same thing is being repeated in V?

So, I don't see what makes V sooooo good over the games we have played so far.

The absence of vehicle based missions is the biggest crime GTA V has committed.

[XenoxX]

Those so many awesome, fresh ideas in V really are not "so many" otherwise why would such threads exist. I don't understand. Do people even realize how much the past games offered and how much of the same thing is being repeated in V?

So, I don't see what makes V sooooo good over the games we have played so far.

The absence of vehicle based missions is the biggest crime GTA V has committed.

Tell me, if V is so "bad" as you say, how come it is a critical and commercial success and one of, no actualy THE most sold game accross 3 different release platforms?

V offers a new narrative and cinematic aproach, a highly innovative 3 character system, a random event system which makes the world feel more alive than any GTA before, a beatifull open world with immense detail, a NPC system which simulates friends and family of the protagonist in a realistic day cycle, narrative integration of side missions such as helping out Michaels family members, a complete new aproach to mysteries with actual mysteries to solve which are more than easter eggs,gun customization, extended vehicle customization, submarines, an underwater world and MORE...

[ClaudeSpeed1911]

 

 

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.

How were the Paramedic Missions handled in Saints Row 2?

 

 

In SR2, while in an ambulance, when you initiate the Paramedic missions you had 10 levels or it may have also be 12, I forget.

 

So instead of having a 3 seat ambulance where you pick up one patient at a time and drive between 1 and 3 to the hospital like in GTA, in SR2, you are called to an accident scene. There are then between 1 and 4 patients lying on the ground of the bloody scene, depending on what level you are on. Once at the scene, you get out of the ambulance and tend to one patient at a time. Depending on the instructions once you get to each patient, either you administer CPR, shock paddles to start a heart, etc. When you finish one patient, you go to the next until you are done with the scene. At the higher levels you will have several accident scenes you need to get to. I believe each level has one more patient in total for the level.

 

Its an interesting take on the motif.

 

Holy sh*t!

I never played this side mission before and it sounds so awesome.

 

SR2 was really awesome but what let me down is the vehicle mechanics and how janky everything was but what made it awesome was the amount of things to do.

 

I wish someone would make something like it with better tight mechanics.

[B Dawg]

The two things I really loved about Saints Row (played only the first) was:

- The Driver: Call up a friend to drive for you, very easy to manage (flick the stick in the direction you want to go when reaching an intersection, don't do anything if you want him to go straight), drives pretty well and you can have all the fun you want doing drive-bys. Something we still don't have in a GTA game but would have been really damn cool.

- MP3 Player and Music Shops: Another awesome thing, listen to anything whenever you want anywhere.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

Tell me, if V is so "bad" as you say, how come it is a critical and commercial success and one of, no actualy THE most sold game accross 3 different release platforms?

V offers a new narrative and cinematic aproach, a highly innovative 3 character system, a random event system which makes the world feel more alive than any GTA before, a beatifull open world with immense detail, a NPC system which simulates friends and family of the protagonist in a realistic day cycle, narrative integration of side missions such as helping out Michaels family members, a complete new aproach to mysteries with actual mysteries to solve which are more than easter eggs,gun customization, extended vehicle customization, submarines, an underwater world and MORE...

Well I think you attribute its commercial success to the fact that it's GTA! And all of them have lived up to the hype except V.

 

And I don't know why you are giving so much credit to V when IV was the game to set all the precedents for it (friends, phone, detailed world, relatable side missions, interwoven narrative, stranger missions), IV is the game that did all that first and in turn influenced RDR's strangers. The success of IV's bank robbery pretty much determined how V was developed!

 

And the additions in V such as car customisation and planes seem much more like a cheap way to succeed San Andreas.

[XenoxX]

 

Tell me, if V is so "bad" as you say, how come it is a critical and commercial success and one of, no actualy THE most sold game accross 3 different release platforms?

V offers a new narrative and cinematic aproach, a highly innovative 3 character system, a random event system which makes the world feel more alive than any GTA before, a beatifull open world with immense detail, a NPC system which simulates friends and family of the protagonist in a realistic day cycle, narrative integration of side missions such as helping out Michaels family members, a complete new aproach to mysteries with actual mysteries to solve which are more than easter eggs,gun customization, extended vehicle customization, submarines, an underwater world and MORE...

Well I think you attribute its commercial success to the fact that it's GTA! And all of them have lived up to the hype except V.

 

And I don't know why you are giving so much credit to V when IV was the game to set all the precedents for it (friends, phone, detailed world, relatable side missions, interwoven narrative, stranger missions), IV is the game that did all that first and in turn influenced RDR's strangers. The success of IV's bank robbery pretty much determined how V was developed!

 

And the additions in V such as car customisation and planes seem much more like a cheap way to succeed San Andreas.

 

"all of them lived up to the hype except V"

That is just your opinion and not the one of the general consumer.

In my honest opinion it lived up to the hype,

 

Also IV set a lot of Vs precedents that is true, but in V the unnecessary stuff was thrown away and the good things expanded upon, all just my personal opinion of course.

Many things such as the underwater world, car and gun customization and Michaels family life was not present in previous GTAs and there is even more to go, to name a few more:

the stunting mechanics which defined a whole new community and created an entirely new audience which managed to enjoy V and overall better game mechanics than old GTAs, better cover mechanic systems, better while still not perfect NPC interaction systems than previous GTAs.

 

Also I do not see how car customization and planes are "cheap ways" of succeeding San Andreas, these features are objectively done better than in San Andreas and well integrated in the game, they aren't just "little gimmicks" they are complete features.

 

And to go on:

GTA V brought back action packed mission design, which was not present in IV and only to a certain extend present in San Andreas, many missions in GTA V do not only look beatifull but they are truly innovative to the series, utilizing the 3 character mechanic in a number of ways, IV had one Heist mission yes, and based upon feedback R* listened and designed the new Heist missions in V which are way better fleshed out with different aproaches to the mission, again something which was not done to this extend before, not in SA nor in IV.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

"all of them lived up to the hype except V"

That is just your opinion and not the one of the general consumer.

In my honest opinion it lived up to the hype,

 

Also IV set a lot of Vs precedents that is true, but in V the unnecessary stuff was thrown away and the good things expanded upon, all just my personal opinion of course.

Many things such as the underwater world, car and gun customization and Michaels family life was not present in previous GTAs and there is even more to go, to name a few more:

the stunting mechanics which defined a whole new community and created an entirely new audience which managed to enjoy V and overall better game mechanics than old GTAs, better cover mechanic systems, better while still not perfect NPC interaction systems than previous GTAs.

 

Also I do not see how car customization and planes are "cheap ways" of succeeding San Andreas, these features are objectively done better than in San Andreas and well integrated in the game, they aren't just "little gimmicks" they are complete features.

 

And to go on:

GTA V brought back action packed mission design, which was not present in IV and only to a certain extend present in San Andreas, many missions in GTA V do not only look beatifull but they are truly innovative to the series, utilizing the 3 character mechanic in a number of ways, IV had one Heist mission yes, and based upon feedback R* listened and designed the new Heist missions in V which are way better fleshed out with different aproaches to the mission, again something which was not done to this extend before, not in SA nor in IV.

V also has a lot of features removed though which actually contributed the world: Michael's family was cool, but so were Niko's girlfriends' conversations. Gun customization is undeveloped, you have agreed with me on this (broken silencers etc). V's cover system is more fluid, but IV's is more animated. The NPC interaction is funny, but overall useless to gameplay, while IV has the ability to restore health via food joints and street vendors so IV has better interaction here. The gun shops are also more interactive as Niko actually checks the guns, in V it's just a menu.

 

Your views on the "action" of V's missions are subjective, IV has many cinematic moments as well, and V is more linear with cutscenes often taking over the action frequently. Also I believe Heists in V were awful and hyped to be something they really weren't, so again, subjective. The so called "different approaches" were really just two different extremely linear and scripted missions.

Edited January 8, 2016 by Cheatz_N_Trickz

[ChiroVette]

Holy sh*t!

I never played this side mission before and it sounds so awesome.

 

SR2 was really awesome but what let me down is the vehicle mechanics and how janky everything was but what made it awesome was the amount of things to do.

 

I wish someone would make something like it with better tight mechanics.

 

 

 

Yeah the Paramedic missions were pretty hot! So were a lot of the side missions. Some of my fondest memories of the game (and I will get back to it...looking for a PC partner for co op now) are the Fuzz missions (hilarious!!), Septic Avenger, various Mayhem, and aa great many things!

 

I agree with you about the driving.

 

 

Osho Quote NOT SonsOfLiberty (crappy quote system!)

Those so many awesome, fresh ideas in V really are not "so many" otherwise why would such threads exist. I don't understand. Do people even realize how much the past games offered and how much of the same thing is being repeated in V?

So, I don't see what makes V sooooo good over the games we have played so far.

The absence of vehicle based missions is the biggest crime GTA V has committed.

 

 

You know what?

 

 

Regarding the question "what's so great about V?" I have been down this road with you several times before, and I am simply NOT going to allow myself to get sucked into the vortex of your unenlightened double-speak and lack of intrinsic ability to acknowledge ANY of the positive attributes of the game.

 

You know what? I am all for posting well thought out, articulated, reasoned, and measured commentary. I can (and have) listed out all the things I love about the game (as well as many things I wish Rockstar had not put in there!). But in the end your only response to anything positive written about V are some variations of the following:

 

"Meh..."

 

"That's not gameplay."

 

"That isn't relevant..."

 

I could go on and on, but I think my meaning is clear. Learn how to debate an issue, my friend. Learn what a clear, conise, and meaningful argument consists of,and learn that sometimes people that disagree with you are not necessarily wrong because "you don't get it." Just because you cannot see all the awesome new features in V does not mean that inherently don't exist.

 

 

Look, I have no problem with people criticizing the game. Guys like fefenc, SonsOfLiberty, ClaudeSpeed1911, BDawg, have brought out many point they don't like, some of which I agree with, some I understand but don't agree with, and some we agree to disagree on. Hell even a heated argument I had with Cheatz_N_Trickz at least showed a mind at work in his responses to me.

 

But you? You wouldn't know a cogent argument and a salient position if it clocked you in the face with a cinder block.

 

 

Osho Quote NOT SonsOfLiberty (crappy quote system!)

but unfortunately ChiroVette totally derailed the discussions from that point onwards to satisfy his own ego and personal bickering.

 

 

You just don't like people calling you on your vacuous, circular reasoning and logical fallacies, and see that as derailing the discussion. Sorry, but the only thing I have derailed is your myopic, intolerant arguments.

Edited January 8, 2016 by ChiroVette

[XenoxX]

 

"all of them lived up to the hype except V"

That is just your opinion and not the one of the general consumer.

In my honest opinion it lived up to the hype,

 

Also IV set a lot of Vs precedents that is true, but in V the unnecessary stuff was thrown away and the good things expanded upon, all just my personal opinion of course.

Many things such as the underwater world, car and gun customization and Michaels family life was not present in previous GTAs and there is even more to go, to name a few more:

the stunting mechanics which defined a whole new community and created an entirely new audience which managed to enjoy V and overall better game mechanics than old GTAs, better cover mechanic systems, better while still not perfect NPC interaction systems than previous GTAs.

 

Also I do not see how car customization and planes are "cheap ways" of succeeding San Andreas, these features are objectively done better than in San Andreas and well integrated in the game, they aren't just "little gimmicks" they are complete features.

 

And to go on:

GTA V brought back action packed mission design, which was not present in IV and only to a certain extend present in San Andreas, many missions in GTA V do not only look beatifull but they are truly innovative to the series, utilizing the 3 character mechanic in a number of ways, IV had one Heist mission yes, and based upon feedback R* listened and designed the new Heist missions in V which are way better fleshed out with different aproaches to the mission, again something which was not done to this extend before, not in SA nor in IV.

V also has a lot of features removed though which actually contributed the world: Michael's family was cool, but so were Niko's girlfriends' conversations. Gun customization is undeveloped, you have agreed with me on this (broken silencers etc). V's cover system is more fluid, but IV's is more animated. The NPC interaction is funny, but overall useless to gameplay, while IV has the ability to restore health via food joints and street vendors so IV has better interaction here. The gun shops are also more interactive as Niko actually checks the guns, in V it's just a menu.

 

Your views on the "action" of V's missions are subjective, IV has many cinematic moments as well, and V is more linear with cutscenes often taking over the action frequently. Also I believe Heists in V were awful and hyped to be something they really weren't, so again, subjective. The so called "different approaches" were really just two different extremely linear and scripted missions.

 

But you do realize that everything you just said is subjecitve as well?

IV is not more interactive just because you say so, I prefer NPCs way over street vendors.

Also the NPC interaction is not just "funny" but also offers gameplay elements it can truthfully generate fun and challenging combat encounters.

Also I allready revised my opinion on silencers and gun customization in V, I think it was fleshed out decently in the Story missions and I named a few examples in the other thread.

Also the gun shops are per se not that much better just because Niko has this additional animation in V you not only have gun customization but also a shooting range activity, which is btw. another new feature.

 

The Heists are the only scripted missions and they are done in similar ways as the IV Heist was done, they are setpieces however, you have a set path with an awesome incinated setpiece to go through, with set up missions which allow to change how the Heist is done or how the escape path is taken entirely.

Objectively I can say that Mission design is way more varied in V than in IV.

[ChiroVette]

But you do realize that everything you just said is subjecitve as well?

 

In Cheatz's defense, I think he does. I honestly think he is just arguing his point now, is all. I may not agree with him about a lot of the flaws versus virtues of V, but he does not strike me as someone who is completely closed off to all reasoning and ideas that are not his own like guys like Osho.

[XenoxX]

 

But you do realize that everything you just said is subjecitve as well?

 

In Cheatz's defense, I think he does. I honestly think he is just arguing his point now, is all. I may not agree with him about a lot of the flaws versus virtues of V, but he does not strike me as someone who is completely closed off to all reasoning and ideas that are not his own like guys like Osho.

 

I was just pointing it out, since I had somehow the feeling his statement implied that everything he said would be objective, which it isn't.

Just wanted to clarify that.

[Cheatz/Trickz]

I agree with the shooting range somewhat, but it is like many "new" features in V just something pulled from SA. However, as stats are quite useless (you agreed) it serves little purpose.

 

Even if you revise your opinion, the fact remains that silencers are still broken, and no mission actually requires them, anything that is truly required is forced onto the player anyway. In free roam; the essence of GTA for many players, these features don't apply.

 

Heist setup missions do not affect heists. You get to choose: scripted heist A, or scripted heist B, or in the case of Paleto; just scripted heist. And what about the crew members? It's a very tacked on feature, there is no thought required really and it doesn't affect the outcome beyond alternate dialogue, the end result for the protagonists is the same, it's just smoke and mirrors, and this is not how they were advertised.

[XenoxX]

I agree with the shooting range somewhat, but it is like many "new" features in V just something pulled from SA. However, as stats are quite useless (you agreed) it serves little purpose.

 

Even if you revise your opinion, the fact remains that silencers are still broken, and no mission actually requires them, anything that is truly required is forced onto the player anyway. In free roam; the essence of GTA for many players, these features don't apply.

 

Heist setup missions do not affect heists. You get to choose: scripted heist A, or scripted heist B, or in the case of Paleto; just scripted heist. And what about the crew members? It's a very tacked on feature, there is no thought required really and it doesn't affect the outcome beyond alternate dialogue, the end result for the protagonists is the same, it's just smoke and mirrors, and this is not how they were advertised.

They were advertised as something that can change the outcome of the Heist, and THEY CAN change the outcome of the Heist, depending on which crew member you picked, if he was too bad he would fail on a specific thing in the Heist and eventually lose money.

Also forcing Stealth is a very bad way of doing game design, that is why in GTA V stealth is allways OPTIONAL never forced or required, however it is very fun and usefull in some missions, free roam is not involved in Stealth, but I think that is not the true essence of cop shootouts etc.

 

And regarding the stats, I revised my opinion on them as well in the other thread, I explained why I think they play a significant part in the Story and are indeed very usefull.

[ChiroVette]

I agree with the shooting range somewhat, but it is like many "new" features in V just something pulled from SA.

 

New rule:

 

We are NOT allowed to complain about all the things San Andreas has that V doesn't and then complain about all the things V used from San Andreas.

 

Mmmmkay?

 

lol I am kidding, obviously. I realize the two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

Edited January 8, 2016 by ChiroVette