Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. Los Santos Summer Special
      2. The Diamond Casino Heist
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA VI

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    3. Gangs

    1. Announcements

    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

UAL

Should the next GTA be more serious?

Recommended Posts

Jammsbro

V was serious. It was also funny.

 

Humour is a huge part of the GTA world. If you remove it you have a dull game with very little replayability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Triple Vacuum Seal

IV had the perfect amount of seriousness to it. The seriousness is needed to build resentment towards the antagonist(s). V was a hackneyed mess and very much over the top by GTA standards. The quality of humor was more of a problem than the quantity of it. Trevor was a big step in the wrong direction. Somehow, the story managed to be shallower than a Disney movie. The story, character, and overall SP development left a lazy impression. Not necessarily lazy in terms of R* labor, but lazy in terms of creativity. A talented child could write a better story for GTAV. And I'm not even joking. But judging from the critical reception, writing doesn't matter anymore. We are in somewhat of a post-SP era. It's all about kill streaks and sh*t now.

 

 

The market for "GTA-clones" is in desperate need of competition to either keep R* in check or provide a serious alternative in the years between releases. The industry has shrunk over the years in that regard. This is why a product such as V can be somewhat flawed, yet blow the critics away. As of now, it's still one of a kind.

Edited by Triple Vacuum Seal
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UAL

Swear some people aren't even reading what I said.

 

I'm not saying take out ALL of the humour. I'm just saying every other character doesn't have to be a "funny" character.

 

RDR had a serious storyline but the humour was still there....it just wasn't over the top to the point where you didn't take the game seriously, like GTA V.

 

People talking about the game doesn't have to be serious for a good story, agree to a certain extent, but let's be honest the reason why we were all so invested in RDR's story was because the characters and themes in the game had a more serious tone to them.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Osho

As already mentioned before, it really doesn't matter to me whether the game is going to be serious or not. Its the whole package that should feel really good and engaging to play and as memorable as SA and VC which are still going strong after all these years.

What Rockstar shouldn't do however is making the games in future ...wayy too much of either of two, because such games never succeed in making the player feel truly satisfied and able to enjoy the game even in the long run without much disappointments, like the experiences in case of both IV and V subject to more than enough divisiveness in recent years in the community compared to earlier 3D titles.

Let's see what they do next.

Edited by Osho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

Swear some people aren't even reading what I said.

 

I'm not saying take out ALL of the humour. I'm just saying every other character doesn't have to be a "funny" character.

 

RDR had a serious storyline but the humour was still there....it just wasn't over the top to the point where you didn't take the game seriously, like GTA V.

 

People talking about the game doesn't have to be serious for a good story, agree to a certain extent, but let's be honest the reason why we were all so invested in RDR's story was because the characters and themes in the game had a more serious tone to them.

Oh I got what you meant the first time bro. I only stated that the game don't have to serious to have a good story just to ward off the inevitable barrage of posters who were gonna make comments stating exactly that.

 

Like I said before....

 

I'm happy for a GTA game be full of the series trademark humour, satire, parody, wackiness etc, but mostly as a sideshow and not as a main theme. It's all good, provided it's not forced, and not thrown in our faces in every major aspect of the game like it was in V, especially via Trevor. I'd much rather all this stuff in the game just play a peripheral role only, like in advertisements, billboards, radio shows, TV, ped dialogue etc - just like it used to be in previous GTAs before V.

 

I prefer GTA to be geared toward a more serious tone than humorous, wacky one, because the business of crime for money and beneficial gain is always a very serious, gritty affair - there is nothing really glamorous or wildly funny about it. VC and SA may have included a ton of funny, wacky moments and aspects, but both those those games were still very serious in terms of their main themes. Playing VC and SA always felt very serious to me, working for a drug baron and creating a Mafia empire, or engaging in vicious gang wars in a battle for turf was always no joke.

Edited by Official General
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UAL

 

Swear some people aren't even reading what I said.

 

I'm not saying take out ALL of the humour. I'm just saying every other character doesn't have to be a "funny" character.

 

RDR had a serious storyline but the humour was still there....it just wasn't over the top to the point where you didn't take the game seriously, like GTA V.

 

People talking about the game doesn't have to be serious for a good story, agree to a certain extent, but let's be honest the reason why we were all so invested in RDR's story was because the characters and themes in the game had a more serious tone to them.

Oh I got what you meant the first time bro. I only stated that the game don't have to serious to have a good story just to ward off the inevitable barrage of posters who were gonna make comments stating exactly that.

 

Like I said before....

 

I'm happy for a GTA game be full of the serie's trademark humour, satire, parody, wackiness etc, but mostly as a sideshow and not as a main theme. It's all good, provided it's not forced, and not thrown in our faces in every major aspect of the game like it was in V. I'd much rather all this stuff in the game just play a peripheral role only, like in advertisements, billboards, radio shows, TV, ped dialogue etc - just like it used to be in previous GTAs before V.

 

I prefer GTA to be geared toward a more serious tone than humorous, wacky one, because the business of crime for money and beneficial gain is always a very serious, gritty affair - there is nothing really glamorous or wildly funny about it. VC and SA may have included a ton of funny, wacky moments and aspects, but both those those games were still very serious in terms of their main themes. Playing VC and SA always felt very serious to me, working for a drug baron and creating a Mafia empire, or engaging in vicious gang wars in a battle for turf was always no joke.

 

 

Nah was going at the guy at the top of the page who for some reason thought I said take away ALL the humour.

 

But yeah I pretty much agree with your whole post.

 

This is what I mean, about the humour just being on the sidelines. Look at GTA3.....almost all the characters bar 1 or 2 were very serious and about their business. All of the humour/piss taking came through the radio stations (Chatterbox FM still the funniest talk radio show to date) advertisements and NPC comments. Hearing some random ped shout out "my mothers my sister" is 100 times funnier than some OTT protagonist like Trevor being forced on us.

 

Look at Madrazzo, this guys meant to be some stone cold cartel boss but he acts like a goofy f*cking twat.

 

I just want to see a more serious story and characters, maybe it's just me getting older but all this whacky humour is for kids.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kraftwerkd

 

 

Swear some people aren't even reading what I said.

 

I'm not saying take out ALL of the humour. I'm just saying every other character doesn't have to be a "funny" character.

 

RDR had a serious storyline but the humour was still there....it just wasn't over the top to the point where you didn't take the game seriously, like GTA V.

 

People talking about the game doesn't have to be serious for a good story, agree to a certain extent, but let's be honest the reason why we were all so invested in RDR's story was because the characters and themes in the game had a more serious tone to them.

Oh I got what you meant the first time bro. I only stated that the game don't have to serious to have a good story just to ward off the inevitable barrage of posters who were gonna make comments stating exactly that.

 

Like I said before....

 

I'm happy for a GTA game be full of the serie's trademark humour, satire, parody, wackiness etc, but mostly as a sideshow and not as a main theme. It's all good, provided it's not forced, and not thrown in our faces in every major aspect of the game like it was in V. I'd much rather all this stuff in the game just play a peripheral role only, like in advertisements, billboards, radio shows, TV, ped dialogue etc - just like it used to be in previous GTAs before V.

 

I prefer GTA to be geared toward a more serious tone than humorous, wacky one, because the business of crime for money and beneficial gain is always a very serious, gritty affair - there is nothing really glamorous or wildly funny about it. VC and SA may have included a ton of funny, wacky moments and aspects, but both those those games were still very serious in terms of their main themes. Playing VC and SA always felt very serious to me, working for a drug baron and creating a Mafia empire, or engaging in vicious gang wars in a battle for turf was always no joke.

 

 

 

Look at Madrazzo, this guys meant to be some stone cold cartel boss but he acts like a goofy f*cking twat.

 

I just want to see a more serious story and characters, maybe it's just me getting older but all this whacky humour is for kids.

 

 

I forgot the entire reason why the first heist happened until they mentioned Madrazzo again. I thought that was the point when the game was going to start getting serious, but then it just continued to jump all over the place.

 

There was absolutely no character development, either. Every character stayed the exact same except for Lamar after Deathwish, and even then that was only delivered through text message. Trevor was always psychotic, Michael was always a prick, and Franklin was always a borderline bitch. You have no way of telling how they got to be who they are, and the writing doesn't put much effort on getting them anywhere different. It's really annoying, actually, because IV had such great character arcs.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fooking Rekt

The next GTA should be like the 3D era again.

 

Obtainable special vehicles, no Online bullsh*t, better difficulty (GTA IV and V are cancerously easy)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin

Yes. I'm not a fan of the tryhard approach like San Andreas and GTA V that try to be funny for the sake of being funny. GTA III, Vice City and GTA IV all had their funny moments, but they didn't feel as forced yet the games could still convey a serious context in a convincing manner. Something I feel San Andreas and GTA V don't do very well.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Racecarlock

The problem wasn't a lack of seriousness. Hell, it might have been the opposite.

 

Take Saints Row, the common series to hate on around here because it is what it is. Saints Row IV, for all of it's faults, was a loving parody. It lovingly parodied movies, video games, comics, super powers, game shows. It said "Hey, maybe this unrealistic, corny stuff has value in our culture. Maybe people like it because it's worth liking, ever think of that?", and so while it does go overboard, it does so in a fun way, at least according to me. That's why I love it.

 

GTA V, for every joke it makes, doesn't seem to want you to genuinely laugh. It wants you to hate pretty much everything about los angeles and it's characters and everything that exists, aside from the animals in the game. If you're a human, it hates you. Are you an over the top angry impotent liberal or an over the top angry impotent conservative? Whatever you are, you are terrible in the game's eyes. If you are a human and you're doing stuff, it hates you. Look at the discrepancies between Impotent Rage and those weird anti windmill commercials. Is it pro environment or anti environment? GTA V is neither, and it thinks if you care at any level beyond smug dismissiveness, you're a wacko.

 

Look at Vice City. For all of it's faults, there's no denying that rockstar in that time absolutely loved 1980s miami. The soundtrack is practically musical porn no matter what you listen to, hell, even the talk radio is funny. The missions were great, the dialogue was wonderful, and every aspect seemed lovingly crafted to the point where you really feel like you're in Vice City.

 

GTA V just quotes mitt romney, reintroduces fernando and lazlow, makes some facebook jokes and then says "f*ck it, I'm done". It's lazy, because the creators didn't want to talk about any aspect of los angeles or current day politics. But since it was outright demanded that V be in the modern era, they decided to be as angry and spiteful of everything that they could and hope one of their parodies hits it off. It doesn't even like it's own fans, I mean, when you look at Jimmy, Lester, or Trevor, do those look like affectionate parodies of us? I don't think they do.

 

Yet, what they did desperately want you to do was take them seriously. Michael has a family, even though the family is a bunch of hateful parodies, but still, please feel tension because they're his family, please TAKE US SERIOUSLY! Look, Michael and Trevor have a conflicted past even though the only bit you saw was one heist, please TAKE US SERIOUSLY! Look, Franklin wants to make money to escape his impoverished urban life! TAKE US SERIOUSLY!

 

None of it fits together. The game hates itself, but wants you to love it. It wants you to see it's satire as deep and meaningful while being neither of those things, it wants you to see it's story as being deep and thrilling when it's neither of those things. I mean, I liked the nutty stunts, but that was it. And the minigun heist, that was pretty fun even if I didn't care about the characters.

 

So, all in all, this "More serious" question is the wrong one, in my opinion. We should be asking ourselves if we want an affectionate parody or a mean spirited one. I personally lean towards "Affectionate", because otherwise the game is depressing me too much to have any fun with it.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coleco

When people talk about what they want from games these days, I see the words "serious" and "realism" way too much for my liking.

 

If someone's priorities demand an immersive experience that is both serious and realistic, my advice is to give real life a try.

 

 

  • KEKW 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheHumanIsland

In a constrast from IV to V, yes. It should be much more serious.

 

I understand V intimately, there is no way that I couldn't, because I understand the world of Hollywood in the same way the shadier parts of the game portray. But do I want something more serious and depraved like niko bellic?

 

YES!

 

Resoundingly. YES!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

When people talk about what they want from games these days, I see the words "serious" and "realism" way too much for my liking.

 

If someone's priorities demand an immersive experience that is both serious and realistic, my advice is to give real life a try.

 

You ain't the first and last to write this bullsh*t.

 

This is a typical response to this subject from someone who completely missed the point. Ignore the deeper meaning of what the point is and just close with a dumb response like "this about fun, if you want realism, try real life".

 

Seriously, you need to try something more original.

Edited by Official General
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UAL

When people talk about what they want from games these days, I see the words "serious" and "realism" way too much for my liking.

 

If someone's priorities demand an immersive experience that is both serious and realistic, my advice is to give real life a try.

 

 

 

Well your liking is completely irrelevant to this thread and in general tbh.

 

Get up off your high horse and realise different people have different ideas and opinions on what makes a good game. Stick to playing 20 man death matches with Rock Launchers and stay out this thread.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TommyMontana

Personally don't like the non sense in V,i prefer a more serious games like IV with more involuntary dark humor(not forced like V). I don't know if is possible on a game,but would be great to see some Visual Comedy(like Edgar's Wright style movies)and the fast action and violence(like Tarantino's movies)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HoleInTheSky

A more serious approach would be preferable. In hindsight, besides parodying reality which GTA's always done well, V's humour was seemingly all over the place and didn't know when to quit, like a comedian who laughs at their own jokes long after the audience has left. Rockstar's abrupt mature turn when it came to producing IV, Max Payne 3 and RDR did come with more gameplay restrictions compared to V, but for games that are about crime (and Rockstar's not afraid to tackle heavy subjects), they were far more serious and shined as a result. So, I'd welcome another major instalment that throws out the ADHD trash entirely, reducing the humour to background decoration.

Edited by HoleInTheSky
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Osho

Nah..much wilder, but engrossing, thoughtful and funny story. I don't want to experience some "gritty realism and serious" storyline like IV or RDR, it just bored the hell of me. Furthermore, the gameplay connected with these game were literally like playing a delivery/errand boy for the most part. Cutscenes might be good, but the gameplay was sh*t.

Sorry, I enjoy GTA when its really stuffed with an interesting gameplay entranced by a storyline that sucks you in doing a lot more than just being an errand boy, so that you can have a lot more to experience than just shooting throughout a significant part of the story, but what you can do with your protagonist. Similar to the amazingly fun storyline of GTA SA with tons of surprises and addictive crime adventure I would want to see Rockstar trying to replicate the experience with future titles with different characters and variety of narrative possibilities that explores various crimes fitting for a modern day GTA than 'feeeeeeel baad fer mee' type of story with a whiny emo character that is simply a waste of time. It doesn't make me feel like I'm playing GTA at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B Dawg

GTA V, for every joke it makes, doesn't seem to want you to genuinely laugh. It wants you to hate pretty much everything about los angeles and it's characters and everything that exists, aside from the animals in the game. If you're a human, it hates you.

GTA V in a nutshell.

 

I would like it if it was mature and serious like GTA IV again but thats not going to happen soo at least I would like something like VC.

 

Not really a "heavy" game but still has a solid storyline and good characters. And even though SA's storyline became a trainwreck the characters were still great throughout the game.

 

Both don't go all obnoxious and crazy for the sake of it like TBOGT and GTA V. I hope they get rid of that particular "style".

I disagree. TBOGT is an excellent game with great characters like Yusuf Amir

Excellent game? GREAT CHARACTERS? Maybe in comparison to GTA V, but otherwise? Hell no!

You've been smoking really bad herb from Jacob/Badman's competitors or something.

Edited by B Dawg
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin

Nah..much wilder, but engrossing, thoughtful and funny story. I don't want to experience some "gritty realism and serious" storyline like IV or RDR, it just bored the hell of me. Furthermore, the gameplay connected with these game were literally like playing a delivery/errand boy for the most part. Cutscenes might be good, but the gameplay was sh*t.

Sorry, I enjoy GTA when its really stuffed with an interesting gameplay entranced by a storyline that sucks you in doing a lot more than just being an errand boy, so that you can have a lot more to experience than just shooting throughout a significant part of the story, but what you can do with your protagonist. Similar to the amazingly fun storyline of GTA SA with tons of surprises and addictive crime adventure I would want to see Rockstar trying to replicate the experience with future titles with different characters and variety of narrative possibilities that explores various crimes fitting for a modern day GTA than 'feeeeeeel baad fer mee' type of story with a whiny emo character that is simply a waste of time. It doesn't make me feel like I'm playing GTA at all.

San Andreas never felt like a GTA game to me even back in 2004. Vice City will always be the pinnacle of the 3D era regarding everything from humour, atmosphere etc. San Andreas was becoming too stupid. Glad they tighten the noose in GTA IV.

 

Personally I don't like it when games present themselves as wild, whacky etc yet try to shoe horn in serious elements rather than a game that has a serious context, but still manages to be humouress.

 

It's more unpredictable IMO and feels more organic than a game which is the complete opposite. I remember in SR2 there was a death scene with that Carlos guy and I'm not sure what the writers were trying to achieve, but it was so out of place I actually laughed at its awkward placement in the story. So corny and cheesy even by Saints Row standards.

 

I feel dark humour works better with a serious context as the back drop (Like GTA IV and RDR). The humour in these games feels more genuine than the times where San Andréas and GTA V try to be serious seeing as 5 minutes later it's back to completely outlandish situations.

 

I'm hoping GTA VI blends what was so great about GTA III and VC and the amazing tone, atmosphere, balance of humour/seriousness of GTA IV, RDR and TLAD.

 

The less it's like San Andreas and GTA V the better.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Queen Elizabeth II

Obviously GTA IV was the best at being funny yet dramatic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XCalinX

I like the GTA 5 story but I agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PacketOverload_x64bit

Honestly, if I could get a re-make of GTA IV, in the new engine with all the trimmings of the GTAV, set in a jump-load-style world between LS and LC and Vice City in the 80's,with lots of neon and Niko - I'd die happy. lol
That's a yes, by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

 

Nah..much wilder, but engrossing, thoughtful and funny story. I don't want to experience some "gritty realism and serious" storyline like IV or RDR, it just bored the hell of me. Furthermore, the gameplay connected with these game were literally like playing a delivery/errand boy for the most part. Cutscenes might be good, but the gameplay was sh*t.

Sorry, I enjoy GTA when its really stuffed with an interesting gameplay entranced by a storyline that sucks you in doing a lot more than just being an errand boy, so that you can have a lot more to experience than just shooting throughout a significant part of the story, but what you can do with your protagonist. Similar to the amazingly fun storyline of GTA SA with tons of surprises and addictive crime adventure I would want to see Rockstar trying to replicate the experience with future titles with different characters and variety of narrative possibilities that explores various crimes fitting for a modern day GTA than 'feeeeeeel baad fer mee' type of story with a whiny emo character that is simply a waste of time. It doesn't make me feel like I'm playing GTA at all.

San Andreas never felt like a GTA game to me even back in 2004. Vice City will always be the pinnacle of the 3D era regarding everything from humour, atmosphere etc. San Andreas was becoming too stupid. Glad they tighten the noose in GTA IV.

Personally I don't like it when games present themselves as wild, whacky etc yet try to shoe horn in serious elements rather than a game that has a serious context, but still manages to be humouress.

It's more unpredictable IMO and feels more organic than a game which is the complete opposite. I remember in SR2 there was a death scene with that Carlos guy and I'm not sure what the writers were trying to achieve, but it was so out of place I actually laughed at its awkward placement in the story. So corny and cheesy even by Saints Row standards.

I feel dark humour works better with a serious context as the back drop (Like GTA IV and RDR). The humour in these games feels more genuine than the times where San Andréas and GTA V try to be serious seeing as 5 minutes later it's back to completely outlandish situations.

I'm hoping GTA VI blends what was so great about GTA III and VC and the amazing tone, atmosphere, balance of humour/seriousness of GTA IV, RDR and TLAD.

The less it's like San Andreas and GTA V the better.

@ SoL

 

I know you don't like SA, and you're entitled to your own opinion, but that's quite unfair to it, to say it don't feel like a GTA game. The only time SA felt un-GTA like was with Mike Toreno's silly over the top secret government agent missions, like 5 percent of the game's story - for most part the story was mostly centered on gang wars, drug trafficking, corrupt street cops, and dealings with the Mafia and Triads. If that's not typically GTA fodder, then frankly I don't know what is. Despite the odd moments of wackiness and over the top stupidity, SA for most part was a serious crime action story. I've just finished a playthrough of SA and I honestly don't find it too humorous or comical in comparison to V's excessive approach in this area.

 

I prefer Vice City over SA, but most people would say otherwise to you and agree that SA was the pinnacle of the 3D era in GTA.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin

It's not that I don't like it OG, but shouldn't you be used to it by now? I've always been pretty firm with my thoughts on San Andreas, but that doesn't mean I don't like it. I just say what I feel. Can't say I make any apologies though. It is what it is.

 

Coming off GTA III and Vice City that's exactly how it felt to me and still does to be honest. I mean you can list what it does and whatnot, but it doesn't change my own personal experience quite frankly.

 

San Andreas' approach to the formula has never been all that appealing to me. It brought some interesting ideas of course, but when I say it doesn't "feel" like a GTA I'm mostly referring to the tone and how the humour, satire and serious moments all interact with eachother. I don't think it's unfair at all to hold that perspective.

 

Whether people agree or not is little of my concern.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Racecarlock

I realized something while posting in another topic, and you're going to have to stay with me on this, but here we go.

 

GTA V was in fact the most serious GTA if you forget about the sunnier setting.

 

Really, like, look at it's attempt at a facebook parody. Does it really look like it wants you to laugh at any of that, or does it want you to go "Yeah, that's really deep and insightful"?

 

Hell, think about every other parody in the game like that. Look at trevor, when you get that mission to get that medicine for his mom, it looks like GTA V honestly wants you to take this cannibal redneck drug dealer with hulk-esque rage superpowers completely seriously, even though his personality for the entire game suggested differently. Hell, look at his relationship with michael. What does that improve? I mean, I sat in on ONE heist in his past and I'm supposed to glean some deep bond from that that goes back years, so much so that I'm supposed to take trevor's hurt feelings seriously, despite him being a cannibal redneck drug dealer. Who is also canadian.

 

That's the thing, all of GTA V's wackiness is completely superficial. Every one of their parodies seems like it wants to be analyzed on a deeper level than just "Ha ha, that's funny", but the problem is that comedy doesn't always have to go that deep, and attempting to make all of your jokes do exactly that only renders the comedy not that funny in the first place. Even Lewis Black has Acidophillus milk jokes.

 

And that's ultimately where I'm coming from, since GTA V wants me to even take all of it's jokes and it's least serious character seriously, it is the most serious GTA and that's what hurts it the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

It's not that I don't like it OG, but shouldn't you be used to it by now? I've always been pretty firm with my thoughts on San Andreas, but that doesn't mean I don't like it. I just say what I feel. Can't say I make any apologies though. It is what it is.

 

Coming off GTA III and Vice City that's exactly how it felt to me and still does to be honest. I mean you can list what it does and whatnot, but it doesn't change my own personal experience quite frankly.

 

San Andreas' approach to the formula has never been all that appealing to me. It brought some interesting ideas of course, but when I say it doesn't "feel" like a GTA I'm mostly referring to the tone and how the humour, satire and serious moments all interact with eachother. I don't think it's unfair at all to hold that perspective.

 

Whether people agree or not is little of my concern.

I never said other peoples views were your concern and I did stressed that you're entitled to your own opinion. So you didn't need to mention that.

 

It's one thing having your own distinct opinion in a forum that very much stands out compared to most others who are generally in line with each other, but its another thing when it comes to how reasonable that opinion is. In this case, I just don't feel thats a reasonable assessment of SA to say it don't feel like GTA, its far off the mark. You don't have to like something, but you can still be reasonable in your assessment of its credentials, and with your assessment of SA I deemed it unfair with good reason.

 

I only stated what I stated to lend support and credibilty to my own opinion that your assessment of SA is unfair. It wasn't designed to make you change your mind or worry about what others think of your opinion.

Edited by Official General

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin

Come on OG. It's not like I ran it into the ground and called the gameplay sh*t like Osho said about GTA IV and RDR, but I'm being unfair?

 

At the end of the day OG you love San Andreas, but I don't. You know that and have known ever since you joined. If anything my post was much kinder than it would've been 5 years ago.

 

Anyway that's how I feel dude. Deem it unfair, unreasonable etc, but I'll stick to my guns 100%.:)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

Come on OG. It's not like I ran it into the ground and called the gameplay sh*t like Osho said about GTA IV and RDR, but I'm being unfair?

At the end of the day OG you love San Andreas, but I don't. You know that and have known ever since you joined. If anything my post was much kinder than it would've been 5 years ago.

Anyway that's how I feel dude. Deem it unfair, unreasonable etc, but I'll stick to my guns 100%.:)

And I've called out Osho for that many times, you've seen me do it. I still feel IV deserves a lot of criticism, but I was shrewd enough a judge to recognise it's great qualities. I love SA, but it's not my favourite GTA, so I'm not biased towards it. I'm just saying it as I see it. Fair enough it's your opinion, like I said before I weren't trying to change it. Stuck to your guns bro, it's all good.

 

Bottom line for me is that SA's story was serious enough for a GTA game, barring a few exceptions like Mike Toreno's part.

Edited by Official General
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Algonquin Assassin

That's fair enough, but unfortunately I just don't share the same view point. It's not quite as bad as GTA V though.

 

Atleast San Andreas has more likeable characters in general to compensate, but it's always felt off putting to the balance that was achieved in GTA III and Vice City which was recaptured again in GTA IV. To me atleast.

 

It all comes down to taste. If that's your thing then that's cool, but I just don't feel it like you do buddy.:)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Osho

It's not like I ran it into the ground and called the gameplay sh*t like Osho said about GTA IV and RDR,

Because it is.

IVs story is well received but the gameplay has been heavily criticized and I've discussed enough number of times explaining the same with several examples and comparisons, not only limited to SA but other games like Mafia City of Lost Heaven. In fact, there're countless number of articles, blogs and public reviews available that also expose the same and the blatant lies being spread around about IVs greatness when it comes to the aspects related to the gameplay. Many reviewers have even questioned the perfect scores that the game received, and have found many things uninteresting to consider as a huge step forward over the past titles.

People point fingers at Vs gameplay but justify the same flaws when it comes to IV, which makes me often wonder how can people ( not directed at you, but in general ) maintain such double standards despite the glaring flaws equally shared more or less by both IV and Vs gameplay?

I've always been open to SAs flaws and never tried to cover up the same with theories that are beyond any logic and any sense. I've only experienced in case of IV that people often take the flaws pointed out by both critics and many players, way too lightly for a game they hail as a masterpiece but are quick to jump the gun when similar flaws exist in any of the other games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.