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

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

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

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

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

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

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Domac

GTA 5 lost "that GTA feel"?

Recommended Posts

ChiroVette
Posted (edited)

I agree with this.

 

GTA V is loved only by kids who complain about graphics, they insult the 3D Era games which are the best, and say on gta v stupid sh*t like "iT HaS tHE bEsT gRapHics" or many childish people who say that complain at "Any 3D GTA > GTA V" which is facts, they say that "you can't afford GTA 5" "you never understood GTA 5"

This is a ridiculous and myopic argument. GTA is beloved throughout the gaming world by people of all ages. People like you, who need to justify why you, personally don't like it, just categorically ignore the facts. LMAO if you think 90 million children bought this game you are delusional. I agree that there are a lot of things that the 3D Era does much better than V. That is opinion, by the way, one we share, and is NOT fact. You don't need to justify your tastes by underhandedly insulting people like all of us who disagree with you by categorically labeling our taste as "childish" lol I am an adult and a professional, not that this is relevant, and I think that V is as good a compromise as could realistically be expected between IV and 3D Era games to satisfy both fanbases.

 

 

 

Thank you for this thread. Also the characters weren't even good at all, and what they did to Johnny's girlfriend is unbelivable. She looks like she came from the trash or something.

Awesome part of the game in my opinion! Actually it makes sense, too. I recently played the Episodes, and you could see, very clearly, where Ashly was headed, not only throughout TLaD, but in the ending scenes. She was not only a f*cking junky, throughout the entire Lost campaign, but she was already circling the drain with her drinking, and her H and Meth use in 2008, presumably the time period of the game. Honestly, if you want to really think ab out it, I am surprised it took her as long as 5 years to end in the state she was in when we encountered her in Blaine.

Edited by ChiroVette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoolMods

You're completly wrong. You're honestly do biased about GTA V and hate GTA IV too much, while IV & TBOGT are the only good HD era GTA's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
Posted (edited)

You're completly wrong. You're honestly do biased about GTA V and hate GTA IV too much, while IV & TBOGT are the only good HD era GTA's.

 

No, you are obviously confusing your opinions with objective facts. My disdain for IV has nothing to do with the fact that you are unable to see that your assertion about GTA V only being loved by children is so absurdly delusional that I believe its your hatred of V that is predisposing you to this ridiculous bias. not me.

 

Want proof? As much as I hate IV, and I really do dislike the game, I am NOT using my feelings about the game to disparage its entire fanbase like your are attempting to do with V, by justifying your own tastes, with blanket statements about the best selling GTA game in the franchise's history.

Edited by ChiroVette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.
Posted (edited)

 

How do you compare the special abilities to Saints Row first, and not Red Dead Redemption, Midnight Club, or Max Payne? That wasn't a good analogy.

Because those games featured it in the first place. Maybe if RDR2 removes the dead-eye ability, no one will say it lost the originaL RDR feel because RDR1 is the only RDR besides the coming RDR2.

 

 

GTA is a series that have lasted for 21 years now, and they all had something unique that made them feel like GTA. GTA V put some new features, and removed some all the original GTAs had (TommyTheMan said some of them).

In old GTAs you felt like you were a criminal that had lots of problems and stuff, and you had to rob people and do missions to get to the top and kill the bad guys. In GTA V you don't because, you are invincible, you can kill like 1000 cops throughout the heists, but you can't kill an FIB agent that is right next to you with a gun and escape. The heists aren't even that realistic as they were in past GTAs. There is also too many of them.

What games featured it? Saints Row? Once again, no they didn't. Those comparisons for Rockstar games were showing that the special abilities were more tied to all three of them, than they were to Saints Row, a non-Rockstar game that doesn't even have those special abilities. Saints Row is a game where you can become a superhero. Those three Rockstar games are grounded, and have similar abilities V has. No, it's not a good comparison.

 

GTA V put some new features, and removed some all the original GTAs had (TommyTheMan said some of them)

You need to name me those vital features, and make sure they change the scope of GTA, in a bad way, because just saying it removed stuff "all" the GTAs had doesn't cut it. You didn't even mention how IV removed lots of stuff that were in the other GTA games. Lots of the fun. It removed the "wasted" and "busted" symbol from the old games, which GTA V brought back. It removed planes, which V brought back. It removed vehicle customization, which V brought back. It removed the tank, which V brought back. It removed a couple of fun weapons, which V brought back (like the minigun). IV was too focused on trying to be the "grounded" GTA to actually keep the fun, and wackiness the older games had. It was too focused in taking itself seriously, and it suffered in lots of aspects because of that. V did the opposite, and knew that lots of GTA fans liked the fact that GTA was also supposed to be fun. The fact that V added new stuff that other games didn't (the new hud, special abilities, multiple characters, animals, massive online) have gives it an identity, and I know you know that.

 

What vital stuff is V missing? Burger Shot interiors? It's not the end of the world, grocery stores still exist. The circle hud? How many people are really complaining about that? The gym, and getting fit? It seriously has no use in V, either way. Gambling? There are other ways to make money.

 

In old GTAs you felt like you were a criminal that had lots of problems and stuff, and you had to rob people and do missions to get to the top and kill the bad guys.

I don't get your criticism here. When, in GTA, weren't you a criminal, who robbed people? GTA V is all about that aspect. The characters are literal criminals, and it's a large part of their story. It's what you start off the game doing.

 

In GTA V you don't because, you are invincible, you can kill like 1000 cops throughout the heists, but you can't kill an FIB agent that is right next to you with a gun and escape.

My dude, in every GTA game, you're someone's errand boy. That's one of the main driving forces for the missions. You do work, because you have to, and want to. Even if who you're taking work from is right in front of you.

 

You aren't invincible in V. Just because you can plan out, and survive heists, because of plot armor, doesn't make you invincible. Going off that, every GTA character is literally invincible, because they can mow down enemies, come out, and do the same thing in the next mission. The only mission in V where you're actually "invincible" is the Paleto Score, and it's already explained why that is. Either way, I'm failing to see how this one's a problem. Because it's a mission where you can shoot at cops, and cause mayhem, like you always could in GTA? There is no way the older heists were more realistic. Older GTAs are self explanatory, but in IV, you robbed an entire bank, while shooting dozens of cops, improvising an escape through a subway system where cops are waiting for you, run through it in and out, and driving off in a car home. At least V added in the aspect of planning out the heist, and how to actually escape. That's a level of realism the other GTAs didn't bother to have. The older GTAs, and their mission setups were all campy, and were piled on with scenarios that were too much to call "realistic". If I'm missing something here, then explain what you meant by this.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
Posted (edited)

What games featured it? Saints Row? Once again, no they didn't. Those comparisons for Rockstar games were showing that the special abilities were more tied to all three of them, than they were to Saints Row, a non-Rockstar game that doesn't even have those special abilities. Saints Row is a game where you can become a superhero. Those three Rockstar games are grounded, and have similar abilities V has. No, it's not a good comparison.

 

For the record, Domac and I probably disagree about most things regarding GTA, but to take his defense in a sort of devil's advocate kinda way, I don't think he means it literally when he says that V's special abilities are like Saint's Row. I think he is using more of an analogy and hyperbole to make his point, not asserting that they are exactly the same. You are correct, the special abilities are nothing like Saint's Row, not TT or IV. But I kind of see his point at the same time. For the record, I DO NOT agree with his point, but I do see the position he is advocating.

 

He is basically saying that V, particularly the special abilities, are too over the top, and resemble Saints Row more than GTA. Is it a hyperbolic statement? Absolutely. And as I said, I don't agree with him, but do see his point. Bringing up IV again, I can absolutely understand that if one is coming off of IV and thinking that this is, in fact, the ultimate GTA experience, then it follows that V is just a little too batsh*t crazy to them because they were expecting the next game, after IV, to be more grounded, realistic, and more Sandbox-Crime-Sim than what GTA V actually is.

 

You need to name me those vital features, and make sure they change the scope of GTA, in a bad way, because just saying it removed stuff "all" the GTAs had doesn't cut it.

 

I am so familiar with the IV-Better-Than-V argument that I could probably regurgitate it for you here, but I won't. I want to see what he comes up with in response to your query.

 

You didn't even mention how IV removed lots of stuff that were in the other GTA games. Lots of the fun.

 

They never do!

 

Kidding. Sort of. My serious point is that waaaay back in 2008 when I was making the same complaint about IV and all the awesome stuff Rockstar removed from San Andreas, I was met with a ton of opposition and rhetoric from IV fans, explaining to me, sometimes angrily, how IV was more of a movie game, and the things they removed were just filler anyway, and blah, blah, blah. I suppose if I were a IV fan and loved that game, and again, was disappointed in V for its non-IV-ness, I would be thinking that all the stuff they added to V (that so many fans, myself included) detract from the game. V removed a "dark, immigrant story," and even though I prefer V's story, I can see that if someone thinks that IV is the epitome of GTA storytelling, that V would appear "less than." I could see how he might be complaining about the cop car Vigilante missions in IV, for instance. I can see how, if he loves the Euphoria engine, that V may seem watered down to him. If he loves the driving in IV, that I quite frankly hate with a passion, he might consider V's driving a step down. IV does a lot of things different than any other GTA game. Which is both what Rockstar wanted AND what some fans loved and are disillusioned that V didn't follow much more in IV's footsteps.

 

That, and a few other things (like superior hand to hand combat, more realistic vehicle deformation, more "weighty" and heavy character movements, and on and on. If I were a real fan of IV and expected V to be its direct sequel, which LMAO clearly is not the case, then I would feel as they do.

 

It removed the "wasted" and "busted" symbol from the old games, which GTA V brought back. It removed planes, which V brought back. It removed vehicle customization, which V brought back. It removed the tank, which V brought back. It removed a couple of fun weapons, which V brought back (like the minigun). IV was too focused on trying to be the "grounded" GTA to actually keep the fun, and wackiness the older games had. It was too focused in taking itself seriously, and it suffered in lots of aspects because of that. V did the opposite, and knew that lots of GTA fans liked the fact that GTA was also supposed to be fun. The fact that V added new stuff that other games didn't (the new hud, special abilities, multiple characters, animals, massive online) have gives it an identity, and I know you know that.

 

Preach it, Brother .Smaher! Testify! Can I heaaaah ya saaaaaay Amen!

 

What vital stuff is V missing? Burger Shot interiors? It's not the end of the world, grocery stores still exist. The circle hud? How many people are really complaining about that? The gym, and getting fit? It seriously has no use in V, either way. Gambling? There are other ways to make money.

 

This is something I would sort of say that I wouldn't mind these things in the game, BUT that I don't think the game is worse for not having them either. Judgement call on Rockstar's part. When you make a game, you CANNOT put everything in it. Time, budget, system resources, last gen consoles limiting the mix, and just prioritizing for and against some things all play a role. In the end, there are many things that GTA fans are ALWAYS disappointed that are "left out" from previous games. But we move on. Well, some of us do.

 

 

Want some examples?

 

-I was very disappointed that 6 Police bribes spawning at every hideout was a feature left out of Vice City.

-I was disappointed that, other than '80's backstory, Donald Love NEVER had his fate or story resolved. TO THIS DAY.

-I was disappointed that we never got to "See Ray in Miami" as he yelled to us when he was leaving town at the end of Marked Man

-I was disappointed we NEVER saw Catalina again after SA. But this I understand because Fido killed her at the end of The Exchange. lol So that one's on me.

-I am disappointed that other than a ghost bomb shot e Ball was left out of EVERY GTA after III

-I was disappointed that even with all the flyables then never brought back the challenging-to-fly half-wing Dodo

-I was disappointed that they didn't bring back vehicle spawning in the Import/Export Garages

-I was disappointed they never brought back the EV Crane and the spawning of GTA pickups for all those vehicles

 

And on and on. All of those examples were not things I was disappointed in IV for, BUT things I was disappointed in 3D Era GTA games. You know what? In the end, I loved the games, and got over it. There are a lot of things I wanted to see in GTA V that didn't make it into the game for whatever reason. I got over it. And before anyone gets mad, I am NOT suggesting anyone just STFU and get over it. I am merely saying that "things being left out" of a GTA game from the last game really is nothing new. It wasn't new in 2008 and wasn't new in 2013.

 

 

 

I don't get your criticism here. When, in GTA, weren't you a criminal, who robbed people? GTA V is all about that aspect. The characters are literal criminals, and it's a large part of their story. It's what you start off the game doing.

 

Totally agree! I mean, if Michael, Trevor, and Franklin don't feel like criminals to him, then clearly he's not paying attention!

 

 

My dude, in every GTA game, you're someone's errand boy. That's one of the main driving forces for the missions. You do work, because you have to, and want to. Even if who you're taking work from is right in front of you.

 

Correct! That has been a staple of every single GTA game since III. I mean, if Fido wasn't an errand boy, starting out after 8-Ball breaks them out of custody, as an errand boy for Luigi, then I don't know who was! His first mission is to pick up Misty from the clinic! I mean, what the hell is more errand boy than that? Fido spends the entire game being an errand boy for Luigi, Joey, Tony, and Sal before Maria screws him with the Mafia. Then he is an errand boy for Asuka, Kenji, Ray, and Donald Love. And what do you call his menial tasks for El Burro, the Yardies, and D-Ice? All errand boy stuff, right up until the end.

 

Tommy? After 15 years in jail, he gets out and is basically Sonny Forelli's errand boy, intimidating jurors, and trying to balance his loyalty to the family with getting out of the mess he was in. He is an errand boy for Carrington and pretty much everyone else, including Diaz and Cortez. Same for CJ.

 

And don't even get me started on all the mind-numbing errand boyish, tedious tasks Niko had to perform both at the behest of his cousin, to save his life many times, and for all the characters he meets.

 

You aren't invincible in V. Just because you can plan out, and survive heists, because of plot armor, doesn't make you invincible.

 

In fact, I would argue that the player is more buffed in IV than in V, with the exception of Trevor's Rage, of course. But this is actually a wash, because the player in IV also has enemies that are a lot tougher. So it evens out in this regard.

 

 

Going off that, every GTA character is literally invincible, because they can mow down enemies, come out, and do the same thing in the next mission. The only mission in V where you're actually "invincible" is the Paleto Score, and it's already explained why that is. Either way, I'm failing to see how this one's a problem. Because it's a mission where you can shoot at cops, and cause mayhem, like you always could in GTA? There is no way the older heists were more realistic. Older GTAs are self explanatory, but in IV, you robbed an entire bank, while shooting dozens of cops, improvising an escape through a subway system where cops are waiting for you, run through it in and out, and driving off in a car home. At least V added in the aspect of planning out the heist, and how to actually escape. That's a level of realism the other GTAs didn't bother to have. The older GTAs, and their mission setups were all campy, and were piled on with scenarios that were too much to call "realistic". If I'm missing something here, then explain what you meant by this.

 

Plus V has MORE heists, and as good a mission as Three Leaf Clover is, it can't compare to any of V's heists. Which in fairness to IV, you can't expect it to. IV's heist was a prelude to what was coming in V. From that standpoint, Three Leaf Clover was a great starting point from which to build the heists in V to a much more complex and innovative level. Not the least of which being alternate approaches that literally change the entire mission in most cases!

Edited by ChiroVette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SmokesWithCigs

 

But did GTA V change so much that it lost the original GTA feel to it?

.

.

.

.

 

Was the GTA franchise ruined by GTA V and its "new features"? Tbh I hope the next GTA won't have those features and that it will feature the old GTA UI (and GTA 4's AI and physics).

 

 

If anything, GTA V redeemed the franchise after the 2008 debacle. GTA V is more reminiscent of the wild, unbridled fun of San Andreas. Thankfully, Rockstar learned a lot from IV's terrible mistakes. I do think that there are some flaws in V. I do agree that you die to quickly in V. But I had the same problem with IV back ten years ago. But IV was worse, because while you may not have died quite as easily as you do in V, your enemies were MUCH MUCH harder to kill. I am playing through the Episodes (or trying to summon the interest to continue) and one of the first things I noticed in TLaD, reminded me of IV. Johnny definitely is more resilient to gunfire than the V trio, BUT the enemies are so much harder to kill that in essence, you really do die easier in IV than V during a gunfight.

 

Not a complaint, just saying that because of the buffed enemies, compared to V, shootouts make it easier to die in IV and the Episodes. If I actually liked the game(s) this might be a good thing.

 

But V improves on SO MANY things. I will grant that there are still too many similarities that V shares with IV, and if I had my way, V would be even more reminiscent of San Andreas than it is. But you can't have everything!

I have to agree iv doesn't feel like a GTA game at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Domac

For those who are confused by me comparing GTA V to SR.

 

GTA V is actually hated so much because of Online, the real root of cancer.

 

The flying OP vehicles they added is what I'm trying to compare to SR.

The special abilities are similar to superpowers in SR4.

 

And, I think this sums it up (skip to 1:15):

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChiroVette
Posted (edited)

o agree iv doesn't feel like a GTA game at all.

 

Lets just qualify this as personal opinion, though. One I certainly agree with you on. But I also know that many IV fans as well as fans of 3D Era GTA games that are critical of both IV and V, have some interesting reasons why they think V doesn't feel like a GTA game. This really is quite subjective. Yes, IV DOES NOT feel like a GTA game. To me. But I know for a fact that it does to a lot of people in this forum, like Ash, Algonquin, Official, and a whole bunch of others. And I want to add something else to this. After playing the Episodes, and still NOT being a fan of them or IV, I will say that they may feel watered down to me, and (again this is very subjective) they also feel like stripped down Econo-GTA to me, if I am truly honest, there really is enough in them to still retain that "GTA feel" in the most fundamental way.

 

They just feel overly restrictive and oppressive to me, as well as a little gameplay-pompous and limiting. But at the most basic level, it is GTA. If I learned nothing else from the Episodes, I learned that. I think it would be more appropriate to say that IV and the Episodes are GTA, just not MY GTA.

 

 

For those who are confused by me comparing GTA V to SR.

 

I wasn't confused at all. I don't agree with your comparisons, BUT I did understand exactly where you were coming from, which is why I didn't call you on it.

 

GTA V is actually hated so much because of Online, the real root of cancer.

 

 

I disagree with this, BUT I would agree with you if you said that many GTA fans hate GTAO not GTA V as a SP game. There is a difference. See, I view GTA V SP and GTAO as two entirely different entities, and I don't think the two should be forced together to disparage one using the other.

Edited by ChiroVette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Domac

 

 

 

GTA V is actually hated so much because of Online, the real root of cancer.

 

I disagree with this, BUT I would agree with you if you said that many GTA fans hate GTAO not GTA V as a SP game. There is a difference. See, I view GTA V SP and GTAO as two entirely different entities, and I don't think the two should be forced together to disparage one using the other.

 

 

What I mean is, GTA V SP is actually a very good game, but the problem is, many people say that it's a Saints Row copy because of GTA Online, where they added all the futuristic crap, which isn't available in GTA V SP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

Couldnt you scratch that itch by not playing Online? Its newer features dont carry over to SP, anyways. And a handful of people on this subforum would rather not play Online anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scorpioxdragon

Couldnt you scratch that itch by not playing Online? Its newer features dont carry over to SP, anyways. And a handful of people on this subforum would rather not play Online anyways.

 

Is it safe to assume that we all agree, GTA Online is really just a different name for GTA multiplayer? It is literally just a multiplayer, with really no difference from other multiplayer games except you have safehouses and garages,.. which some multiplayers have similar but other than that... yea it's just a multiplayer.

 

I played online very briefly when they had one of those "play free this weekend" things.

 

After looking into it, the jacked up prices, the things you actually do in the game... there are other multiplayers I'd much rather play. I don't have XBL Gold all the time, just when there's something I want to play online with, and this really isn't it.

 

It really just felt like unless you had a bunch of people you play stuff with, you're just grinding for in-game money or buying in-game money with real money, just so you can buy more things in game.

 

Well, to each their own I guess.

 

But yeah, if we're saying GTA V Online, does not feel like GTA.. IMO, that's cause it isn't. GTA, in it's recent incarnations, always has a story. GTA V Online does not. Not a bad thing, just a thing.

 

I think people have the right to like whatever games they like.

 

... but I'm seriously sick of hearing about fortnite and all the battle royale craze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.
Posted (edited)

Theres no point in getting yourself worked up over people playing an online game they like. Nothing wrong with being a single player kinda person, but saying youre sick of people getting excited over anything multiplayer makes you look entitled, when you can just stick to story mode, and let everyone else be on their way.

 

GTA, story mode or not, is still GTA no matter what angle you look at it from. Online even has a story to it, but even if it didnt, thered still be no false advertising in the games name.

 

I bet if the SP DLC had come out, the minority that hate Online would be even more minor.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gtafaninwest

Given the lack of attention Cockstar gave for SP, I'd say yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol232

GTA V did feel like a GTA game to me. GTA Online, however, doesn't. Early on it did, but not anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

Online is funding them majorly. From a business standpoint, why the hell would they stop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Domac

Online is funding them majorly. From a business standpoint, why the hell would they stop?

Old R* would stop and probably listen to their fanbase that's over 10 years old, and they'd try to fix GTA:O then to make it good like it was before.

 

Now, money runs everything in every company, which is sad.

 

 

 

Hell, if I wanted to play GTA multiplayer with some autistic kids and P2W elements, I'd play San Andreas Multiplayer instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.
Posted (edited)

 

Online is funding them majorly. From a business standpoint, why the hell would they stop?

Old R* would stop and probably listen to their fanbase that's over 10 years old, and they'd try to fix GTA:O then to make it good like it was before.

Now, money runs everything in every company, which is sad.

Hell, if I wanted to play GTA multiplayer with some autistic kids and P2W elements, I'd play San Andreas Multiplayer instead.

Unfortunately, you don't determine that Online isn't good now, like it "was before". Numbers do. If the numbers were bad, and the majority thought the game needed to go back to their basics, then Rockstar would do the necessary and go back to the basics. But because that's as far from the truth as you can imagine, they wouldn't do something as stupid as that. If it gets millions of players weekly, and it's had its highest numbers ever this year, then the majority of players that think it's good now, and there's no reason to stop what they're doing. That means absolutely none of that personal bias matters in the longrun. It's making them money, so they're not obligated to. If Online was "broken", millions wouldn't be playing it, still, and it wouldn't have helped the game make 6 billion dollars. You don't want them to "fix" GTAOnline. You want them strip it to bare bones so you can be satisfied, while the people who play it aren't. Really nice.

 

It doesn't matter what you'd rather play, because the gaming industry doesn't revolve around only you. Because of that, Rockstar's not thinking of the specific ones or twos who'd rather play San Andreas Multiplayer. They're thinking of the ones that put their updates to good use. The updates where you have three different options: grind/work to make money, buy shark cards/skip all the hard work they made, or don't play them.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViceBoy69

Chirovette all i can say to all your comments is f*ckING YAWN YAWN YAWN you make me tired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EvaLisa
Posted (edited)
Quote

Crackdown was envisioned to exceed the gameplay of Grand Theft Auto, giving the player "toys" to create their own in-game moments that could be verbally shared with others.[10] The crackdown logo is in the shape of the agency tower, modified.[11] The entire playfield was to be open at the start, requiring the need to create a progression for the player, while still allowing for experimentation.[10] Realtime Worlds had hired a number of former Grand Theft Auto developers who experimented with refining the game's sandbox element. "It was a big part of the idea to just let people do things", Realtime Worlds producer Phil Wilson said about the gameplay; "testers would do things we were completely blown away by".[12] Dave Jones, CEO of Realtime Worlds, described the concept of the game as "How do we reward somebody for just having fun?"

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crackdown

 

Quote

It doesn't matter what you'd rather play, because the gaming industry doesn't revolve around only you. Because of that, Rockstar's not thinking of the specific ones or twos who'd rather play San Andreas Multiplayer. They're thinking of the ones that put their updates to good use. The updates where you have three different options: grind/work to make money, buy shark cards/skip all the hard work they made, or don't play them.

If GTA Online is defined by these three options (grind to get reward, pay to get reward, or don't launch the game) then it misses the most fundamental and basic GTA game design option, defined by David Jones (GTA founder / Lead Designer) to feel like GTA.

 

"How do we reward somebody for just having fun?"

Edited by EvaLisa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lioshenka
Posted (edited)

I had to launch On-line yesterday. it was a pain in itself: I had a colourful radar installed to re-place that horrid depressing grey one, and On-line would not let me in, because my game was "modified" even though I tried to start a solo session. I spent almost an hour installing it, and then over an hour downloading 5Gb of up-dates. Yay, I'm in.

 

My objective? Drive Cheburek, the only worthy car in the game. Sadly, GTA 5 offers very limited choice of different cars (not models, but rather types/eras). To get Cheburek, you have to be a level 5; to be a level 5 you need points; to get points you need to complete races. So I did some races, and it was a horrible surreal experience for me. R* have literally added Hot Wheels ramps and booster pads IN THE AIR all over the map. It wasn't the greatest map before, but now the illusion of it being a real world was completely taken away by these sky races.

 

It was yesterday when I realised: I'm going to get 100% on this game; and after that I will sell it, like I did with GTA 4. Neither are worth keeping. In contrast, I bought myself a PS2 and will be buying SA next week.

 

R* have lost me as a customer, I am afraid, after they refused to release RDR on PC and what they did to GTA post-SA. It will take a lot of serious convincing to get me to buy GTA 6, if it ever comes out to replace the stupid Online. I'm certain at this point that GTA 6 will be a total dissapointment to fans of the series. Fun, quality game for the kids - yes, worthy successor of the GTAs - no.

Edited by Lioshenka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViceBoy69

I agree gone are the days of a good GTA its all about money and online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gta111
Posted (edited)

Yeah, GTA V feels too scattered, the story line way too chill, comical, and commercial, and gta online has turned into saints row online. smh Not enough substance for me, not dark enough, not enough character, but thats also partial due to how things are irl nowadays so i can kind of understand why its like this. Though still leaves alot to be desired.

Edited by gta111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViceBoy69

I have never been able to really find anything wrong with Saints Row i have Saints Row 2 on my pc and IV on PS3 its not GTA and it doesnt pretend to be, my 2 kids love it i find it ok for a mess about on now and again.

I just expected more from GTA5, dont get me wrong it looks great and i enjoy kicking around in places like Sandy Shores especially at night, it has an atmosphere all its own, but the game doesnt make me want to play the missions like GTA4 did, maybe its the characters ? i really dont know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LANNIS7ER

I prefer it that way

 

GTA V > all the other GTAs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack Lupino

No. GTA 5 is the game that reminds me why i loved the franchise at the first place.

It is vastly superior to all previous games not named San Andreas.

While people might not like the storyline you have to admit 5 offered many diverse missions and immersive gameplay.

I felt asleep playing gta 4 same shooting,driving and killing and come back YAWN!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NeonDolphin

GTA 4 already "lost that feel" of GTA 3 era games.

 

GTA VC "lost the feel" of GTA 1 & 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cristeo

It has that gta feel but I felt disapointed the first time I played it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yasherif

I think you guys are missing the 1st time feel, the impact is gone that is why you feel this way.  Looking at some of the latest games coming out from e3 I could say I am almost excited about NOTHING.  But that is gaming now.  U've reached the top by playing a game like this.  If u still crave the impact of 1st time playing it online like in GTA 4 u will be always disappointed.  

 

I still love the game and never managed to replace playing it with anything else.  We are very spoiled with amount of cars/money/and character customization this game offers us.  Let's not forget that other games always ask for money so u can earn a back pack.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D9fred95
2 hours ago, yasherif said:

I think you guys are missing the 1st time feel, the impact is gone that is why you feel this way. 

Except that installments like Vice City, San Andreas, etc still feel like GTA despite playing them for years. Overexposure is not the issue here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViceBoy69

My main complaint with GTA5 is fact you have to play with the three main antagonists, id rather GTA5 had been like 4 with a different game for each but have the games joined together better, if you have played GTA4 and EFLC you will understand what i mean.

I f*cking hate Trevor he just puts you off playing the game, to me GTA5 single player was ill conceived

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

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

×

Important Information

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