In some ways the 3D era games have better handling

[sagsf420]

For the most part I still prefer driving in IV and V over the older games because of the improved controls, dynamic damage system, first person, ect but I find it's very hard to flip cars in the newer games, yeah IV had lots of body roll but the cars rarely actually went over and even felt somewhat glued to the road, in the GTA 3 era you had to be very careful taking sharp turns at high speeds especially in certain vehicles. While the actual handling has been improved for the most part and driving in the newer games is more fun, realistic (for the most part) and even easier IV and V there were some ways in which 3, VC and SA had it down better, anyone else feel this?

[Testarossa]

Absolutely not. If I recall correctly, heavy vehicles like the Mule and Boxville rolled over when taking a curb at high speeds. And some cars barely even turned. Bikes were horrendous as well, they felt too heavy and took a lot of effort to turn.

[B Dawg]

Yeah IV had lots of body roll but the cars rarely actually went over and even felt somewhat glued to the road

Try the Sentinel in IV

 

I think IV nailed the handling, with San Andreas coming in 2nd.

[The Dedito Gae]

The 3D era had better driving on bikes though, IV is way too slidey to be enjoyable and V is arcady as hell, both phisics are also embarrasing, bikes in IV lack any weight and "hiccup" off the road way too often, in the latter bikes are glued to the ground and is just way too dumbed down, you can't even balance your weight anymore while driving.

[Fuzzknuckles]

I think V achieved about as good a balance of the previous games as it was possible to do, handling wise. They're all flawed in one way or another.

[Guest]

IV is straight up best, SA had a good balance between fun and accessibility, and V just straight up sucks for anyone who wants to sink a lot of hours into it. I can see why it appeals to casual or new players that just want to play through the story once and put the game down, but for everyone else it's just lame.

[universetwisters]

I liked the driving in GTA 3. It was cartoony enough to be fun, not cartoony enough to be dumb like it was in V.

[GTA-Biker]

My favorite vehicle handling was in GTA SA,maybe because that's the GTA game I played the most,but I think it was well balanced.It was fun and also somewhat realistic (not as realistic as GTA 4 handling,but much more realistic than GTA 5).

[Raj The Rager]

No. Handling was like driving on ice in the 3D GTAs. GTA IV and GTA V has smoother handling.

[gooeyhole]

I liked the driving in GTA 3. It was cartoony enough to be fun, not cartoony enough to be dumb like it was in V.

I feel like in III vehicles had more power. You can blow a sedan the f*ck out when you're in something like a firetruck or fish van.

[universetwisters]

 

I liked the driving in GTA 3. It was cartoony enough to be fun, not cartoony enough to be dumb like it was in V.

I feel like in III vehicles had more power. You can blow a sedan the f*ck out when you're in something like a firetruck or fish van.

Oh absolutely.

 

Realism doesn't always mean it's fun.

[Osho]

GTA III was great in terms of driving but the vehicles were not too resistant against damage, esp., weapons, and quite easy to blow up, which VC and SA further improved.

3D era games have a nice balance between not too realistic nor too arcadey. It managed to offer that sweet spot which helped to make stunts and driving experience a whole lot of fun.

While I liked IVs driving, there are certain changes which I find it pointless ( as in anti-fun ) additions that are introduced to make the experience somewhat realistic with the new handling and damage model, physics, and being thrown out of the windshield.

Apart from the improvements to the damage that vehicles take, I found IVs improvements to the driving quite exaggerated that didn't benefit to improve the FUN factor I used to have during 3D games, rather than pushing the experience into the territory of being a "driving simulator".

There're hardly any challenging races, or any interesting possibilities and opportunities to use IVs driving that requires more skill and careful approach from the player behind the wheel. Not even story missions allow the player to put the skills of this driving simulator to test. Most chase missions are anyways scripted with NPC cars that are cheating no matter how fast and better you drive in chasing them, thus restricting you from getting a lead until the script allows it.

So, I really don't understand why make the experience of driving so complex that feels closer to the real life experiences of driving but has no use in game for making it worthy enough to bring the changes over the 3D titles???

If anything, IVs driving is way too tedious since it has impaired the fun and risk-taking behavior behind driving in the 3D era with more skilful, realistic approach of being randomly thrown out of the windshield or dying instantly on crash. Niko being such a slow ass to control and weak in health just makes the whole driving experience more annoying and waste of time in keeping his health up all the time whenever I was in some good mood of reckless driving and interested in stunting.

I'm not complaining about IVs driving but questioning the purpose behind making the experience feel like a full blown driving simulation with realistic physics and gimmicks that I find quite anti-fun about the whole experience. It sacrificed the arcadey aspect too much and in return for what?

Apart from the feeling of, "OH GOD ITS DRIVING LIKE REAL LIFE", I really don't see the point in IVs driving that sounds fun for spending good time doing all sorts of fun stuff that 3D era driving allowed to do.

Realism is good only when it serves an important purpose in making the gameplay interesting without making it look like a waste, and in case of IV, "OMG THE FEELS" of driving similar to real life.

[Algonquin Assassin]

The 3D era is ok regarding the driving, but GTA IV's still better and more enjoyable IMO. Making the driving more technical increased the "fun factor" for me atleast.

[RASPY]

In my opinion, the driving in every other game in the series is inferior to IV. It took some getting used to at first, but once you realised that you can't just hit R2 and not let go, it was tremendous. Bike physics were trash though.

[gunziness]

IMO the handling in III and VC was bearable, not bad but not great either. SA improved it a lot, and given the diverse amount of vehicles, it exploited it to the fullest. With IV, they took huuuge step forward by creating pretty much the most refined, fun and sophisticated handling system from any GTA. It was not perfect, but it was close to it. Combined with the bikes handling/physics from TLAD it is very enjoyable. I cant count how many hours i spent driving in this game.

 

Too bad GTA V shat on everything achieved with IV. The good thing is that the physics and mechanics from IV are still there somewhat, but they are simply dumbed down/misused. By modifying the handling however, the driving can be enjoyable almost as much as in IV.

Edited May 21, 2016 by gunziness

[Fooking Rekt]

No. Handling was like driving on ice in the 3D GTAs. GTA IV and GTA V has smoother handling.

GTA Online is propably the only GTA you ever played

[reform]

The self-righting nature of vehicles in V is a bit annoying to me. I liked that it was very possible to flip your car in 3/VC/SA, and even found that it was really a good system for keeping you stealing new vehicles and getting into fun situations whenever you rolled your car.

 

What annoys me most about V is that the controls to roll your car right/left are counter-intuitive.

 

In the real world (and in the previous games), if you found yourself on two wheels, about to roll over on to your roof, if you steered towards the side your wheels were on the ground/away from the side your wheels were in the air, it shifts the weight to the opposite side, planting your wheels back on the ground. In V, doing this actually causes you to roll over, as the vehicle roll rontrols are on the same stick as the steering. If the roll controls were inverted, or on the other stick, or simply didn't exist, I'd enjoy driving a whole lot more.

[sagsf420]

The self-righting nature of vehicles in V is a bit annoying to me. I liked that it was very possible to flip your car in 3/VC/SA, and even found that it was really a good system for keeping you stealing new vehicles and getting into fun situations whenever you rolled your car.

 

What annoys me most about V is that the controls to roll your car right/left are counter-intuitive.

 

In the real world (and in the previous games), if you found yourself on two wheels, about to roll over on to your roof, if you steered towards the side your wheels were on the ground/away from the side your wheels were in the air, it shifts the weight to the opposite side, planting your wheels back on the ground. In V, doing this actually causes you to roll over, as the vehicle roll rontrols are on the same stick as the steering. If the roll controls were inverted, or on the other stick, or simply didn't exist, I'd enjoy driving a whole lot more.

I also find the roll controls are way too powerful, I've had lots of would be epic crashes ruined by that feature, I just wish I could turn it off. Personally I just don't like cars that handle like gliders when airborne.

[Raj The Rager]

 

No. Handling was like driving on ice in the 3D GTAs. GTA IV and GTA V has smoother handling.

GTA Online is propably the only GTA you ever played

 

Exactly! Just because I believe the handling in the 3D GTAs wasn't that good, (Which it really wasn't) I must be new to the GTA series. Fanboy.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Chamberman20

[Fooking Rekt]

Lol i'm not a fanboy, you propably only played GTA Vice City of all the 3D GTA's and assume they all have the same handling.

[Raj The Rager]

Lol i'm not a fanboy, you propably only played GTA Vice City of all the 3D GTA's and assume they all have the same handling.

I played all of 3D GTAs. The only 3D GTA I've beaten was GTA San Andreas so far, and it's my favorite GTA game. I'll admit, there were car handling improvements throughout the 3D era, but anyone could tell you that the handling was nowhere as great as the HD GTAs.

[Fooking Rekt]

 

 

13:42 Yeah, really good handling LOL.

[Misunderstood]

3D Era and IV driving was great. V f*cked it all up.

[Eugene H. Krabs]

The handling in the 3D games and IV was great until they butchered it in V, where the handling felt like a piece of wet turd.

[Raj The Rager]

 

 

13:42 Yeah, really good handling LOL.

More like nip-picking at it's finest. He was about to lose control but he regained it without hitting anything. Not mention that's what could happen when you're going fast if you stir too much.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Chamberman20

[Fooking Rekt]

No rain, nothing happens and he loses control of the vehicle.

[Raj The Rager]

No rain, nothing happens and he loses control of the vehicle.

(Edit) Have you ever driven a car, or seen NASCAR races? You don't need rain to lose control of your front wheels, while speeding. What happened was he wasn't driving straight (he was heading over to the right), so he decided to try to get back into his lane. Instead of slowing down so he could stir into his lane, instead he swings it to the other side of the road. So therefore, it wasn't the games handling it was him not thinking. But he handle the vehicle well in order to not hit anything.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Chamberman20

[Fooking Rekt]

NASCAR vehicles are built to have high speeds, they aren't built to have good handling.

[Raj The Rager]

NASCAR vehicles are built to have high speeds, they aren't built to have good handling.

So are most super cars, what's your point?

[Fooking Rekt]

 

NASCAR vehicles are built to have high speeds, they aren't built to have good handling.

So are most super cars, what's your point?The car he is driving doesn't seem like a super car, it drives way too slow.

 

But then again, the Laser isn't even that fast. It's propably a GTA V thing, idk.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Fooking Rekt