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. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. 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

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    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

      1. Court House
    3. Suggestions

does anyone prefer RDR1 over the second?


7th Ward Charizard

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

It's not that having no glory and fanfare automatically makes a death more impactful than a long cutscene one. It's just a method they used to make that specific death impactful. It worked because it was a twist, a gang member dying without even time for a cutscene isn't something you expect and it feels unfair and heartwrenching to just have to move on. Whereas Arthur's death scene is impactful in other ways. 

 

There's examples where they just didn't bother to do much with someone's death for no real good reason in Rockstar games and could've done it better (one example would be Ray Boccino in GTA IV). But I think Lenny's death is done the way it is very deliberately. 

I understand your perspective but I don't share your feelings about it. If we think about Johnny K's death, I admitted before that it is effective in giving a strong introduction to Trevor. That is an example of how an important character gets a shocking low-value death. Problem with Lenny is that, the way it is done is sloppy as I argued earlier about the timing, the scripting and what not. Secondly Lenny isn't a character that matters. He's not written extensively, he doesn't play a major role in the story. You may like him but you know when you give a raw death to someone like that, it comes off forgettable. I guess the problem is that Rockstar thought too highly of their characters. Hence why some argue that Lenny's death was too early. Because R* didn't prep the goat enough for the slaughter.

Edited by Ryo256
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/10/2020 at 1:07 PM, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

That's how I felt when I played it for the first time recently lol. You've got the great physics and satisfying sound/feel of shooting, similarly to GTA IV, but with smoother movements and improved graphics. They achieved a perfect balance in a 2010 game but then threw away the whole first part by 2013. I really don't get it. 

Oddly I feel this is one of the few ways RDR2 is inferior to RDR1. The sound/feeling of shooting of RDR2 is nowhere near as good. I'm not sure if that was meant to reflect the shooting of the period (1890s) or not, but I felt gunplay was less fun than in RDR1.

 

Overall, there's very little between the games. Both are masterpieces. Rockstar showed they can take more or less the same environment, and same theme, and keep it fresh, exciting and developing. Sorry to mention it in here, but I hope its a lesson for those that think Rockstar couldn't pull off another Vice City in VI.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that i also don't like in RDR2, in fact, i hate it, is Micah's death scene. He gets shot 6 times in the face but can still walk. They should've just kept the ragdoll physics but no, they made a goofy death animation where he walks a bit, makes a "funny" gesture then dies. They should have added a laugh track too.

 

In RDR1, when you go to a town or even in the middle of the desert, you can see people robbing, people getting kidnapped, lawmen chasing outlaws, gangs, shootings, murder etc, showing the cruel dying WILD WEST. While in RDR2, things like that only happen once, then after it happens the only random events you'll find have the Blind Man. And everything feels much more civilized, for example: if you bump into someone, you get like 4 witnesses calling the sheriff because you were disturbing the peace.

Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
8 hours ago, GuiCORLEONEx794 said:

In RDR1, when you go to a town or even in the middle of the desert, you can see people robbing, people getting kidnapped, lawmen chasing outlaws, gangs, shootings, murder etc, showing the cruel dying WILD WEST. While in RDR2, things like that only happen once, then after it happens the only random events you'll find have the Blind Man. And everything feels much more civilized, for example: if you bump into someone, you get like 4 witnesses calling the sheriff because you were disturbing the peace.

 

It sucks that they added "disturbing the peace" as a crime. In RDR1 you choose to commit crimes or not, there's no vague nonsense where you get a wanted level for accidentally bumping into someone. It's even possible to be completely immune to getting a wanted level/bounty if you've 100%ed the game and earned the bureau outfit or to be immune from losing honour with the bandana, total freedom. Surely they must've known that people hated how easily you could accidentally get a wanted level for nothing in GTA V? But they still carried it over from it anyway.

 

They clearly purposefully want the wanted system to be overly strict and discourage messing around/having fun in their games now, in one game it could've been a miscalculation in design but continuing it in a second game proves it. The only reason I can think of for this is it's an attempt to force players to play a certain way to make things easier for them in some aspect, perhaps to hide flaws or limitations in the game design (eg npc behaviour, the wanted/bounty system itself) or character writing/consistency (the honour system) that might become exposed if players have more freedom. It's just like how they've made missions so tightly scripted and lacking freedom now, GTA V started it and RDR2 continues it. It's strange to me that RDR2 isn't acknowledged as having some major flaws that clearly come directly from GTA V more often. 

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2020 at 3:10 PM, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

The only reason I can think of for this is it's an attempt to force players to play a certain way to make things easier for them in some aspect, perhaps to hide flaws or limitations in the game design (eg npc behaviour, the wanted/bounty system itself) or character writing/consistency (the honour system) that might become exposed if players have more freedom.


It is the narrative-based obsession of Rockstar. Crime was dying in GTA V as it is also in RDR2. That's why Lamar's actions were considered foolish (e.g Franklin saying that cops can easily track Lamar during the Ballas kidnapping mission) in GTA V. That's why the police system is harsh in RDR2 too, because outlaws aren't wanted. You know how I feel about this, I hate it when games take their story too seriously at the cost of gameplay and Rockstar went too deep with RDR2.
 

On 12/18/2020 at 3:10 PM, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

It's just like how they've made missions so tightly scripted and lacking freedom now, GTA V started it and RDR2 continues it. It's strange to me that RDR2 isn't acknowledged as having some major flaws that clearly come directly from GTA V more often. 


It is not strange to me since GTA V was also immune to criticism for a good amount of time after its release (and it still is in places outside this forum). There is a bias towards Rockstar game, especially the latest one but also there is another reason. RDR2 was not shoved in everyone's faces by the fanbase like they did with GTA V, significant number of people found the game to be too boring and anti-fun. So in a way, RDR2 kinda faded due to the divided reaction. So due to not getting enough attention, people never quite got to point out its flaws in detail so it didn't get the same critical treatment as GTA V.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
3 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:


 


It is not strange to me since GTA V was also immune to criticism for a good amount of time after its release (and it still is in places outside this forum). There is a bias towards Rockstar game, especially the latest one but also there is another reason. RDR2 was not shoved in everyone's faces by the fanbase like they did with GTA V, significant number of people found the game to be too boring and anti-fun. So in a way, RDR2 kinda faded due to the divided reaction. So due to not getting enough attention, people never quite got to point out its flaws in detail so it didn't get the same critical treatment as GTA V.

I kind of spoke inaccurately there since the strict missions thing actually started in RDR1. But at least there was a lot of freedom outside missions and crime (or even just trying to mess around without accidentally committing crime) wasn't discouraged through tedious overly strict consequences. You're right about the narrative thing I think, it really seems like a control issue in general though since for example Trevor committing random crime doesn't go against the narrative but is still tediously punished. I think it's a combo of wanting control over the narrative and laziness (allowing less freedom allows them to do less work in a lot of areas).

 

The thing about it that seems weird is I do see GTA V and RDR2 get criticism for these things separately but it's rare to see the link made that it's a trend continued from one game to the other. On the contrary, very often people say that RDR2 improved over GTA V in every way! I do agree that it's a better game but the most obvious flaws it has which prevent it from being close to perfect all blatantly come directly from GTA V. I love loads of things about the game and it's heartening for me to see they still care about the single player story (with fears of them increasingly only caring online in mind), but it's sad to see they don't seem to have learned much/picked up on areas that certainly should've been improved from V.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

I kind of spoke inaccurately there since the strict missions thing actually started in RDR1.


It wasn't that awful in RDR1. To be fair the narrative-focus thing started more from GTA IV but the thing about both RDR1 and GTA IV is that you could easily dive in and start having fun right away. There is a reason why most people can't stomach a second playthrough of RDR2, because it requires going through a lot of tedious restrictions and sequences before you get to the fun parts. This is also why people prefer Online modes, because gameplay is given priority. 
 

36 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

laziness (allowing less freedom allows them to do less work in a lot of areas).


There is some negative things I can say about RDR2 but laziness is not one of them. It is more of a waste of resources and mis-direction IMO, just like R* spending more time on building the ocean but not the interiors in V, similarly RDR2 focused too much on quantity of content rather than giving player freedom over said content.

 

39 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

The thing about it that seems weird is I do see GTA V and RDR2 get criticism for these things separately but it's rare to see the link made that it's a trend continued from one game to the other. On the contrary, very often people say that RDR2 improved over GTA V in every way! I do agree that it's a better game but the most obvious flaws it has which prevent it from being close to perfect all blatantly come directly from GTA V.


The thing is that most people who have this opinion, tends to have no issue of such things in GTA V e.g the restrictive narrative approach is justified and welcomed by many.
 

40 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

but it's sad to see they don't seem to have learned much/picked up on areas that certainly should've been improved from V.


This is what made me lose hope for GTA 6. Because RDR2 didn't face "hardware limitations" so Rockstar got to show their direction in video games without any barriers and well.......it seems the "mistakes" of GTA V were not mistakes at all. They were deliberate features and future of Rockstar is more likely more restrictive-narrative approach rather than focusing on player freedom.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2020 at 3:51 PM, Ryo256 said:

There is some negative things I can say about RDR2 but laziness is not one of them. It is more of a waste of resources and mis-direction IMO, just like R* spending more time on building the ocean but not the interiors in V, similarly RDR2 focused too much on quantity of content rather than giving player freedom over said content.

 

Rockstar was definitely lazy in some parts of the game. One of the examples is how they reused a lot of things from Arthur to John. Hairstyles, body model, most of the animations, the way John walks at beechers hope and pronghorn ranch which is the same exact walking animation as Arthur's and the way John has Arthur's puking voice for whatever reason (its so obvious that is Arthur's) etc.

 

It is selective laziness. There are a lot of great details but there is also laziness such as epilogue John.

 

People say that they ran out of time and they had to reuse a lot of things from Arthur to John, but there are RDR1 John textures in the player files which proves that John was meant to be the epilogue protagonist since early development.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, GuiCORLEONEx794 said:

It is selective laziness. There are a lot of great details but there is also laziness such as epilogue John.

 

 

This was a thing in RDR1 also. John and Jack shares few sounds, like when falling or breathing while sprinting. Even zombie John uses some of them.

Edited by Kubigz
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kubigz said:

 

This was a thing in RDR1 also. John and Jack shares few sounds, like when falling or breathing while sprinting. Even zombie John uses some of them.

Yep, John and Jack also share same animations.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8

I love liar's dice! Only problem is the AI opponents are a bit too bad at it, quite predictable and they literally never bid "spot on" (I don't think they're able to) so it's very easy to win every time. It's also a shame you can't bet more than $20 on it. Definitely a shame it isn't in RDR2 where they could've made it even better with smarter/more challenging opponents and higher stakes.

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Redemption feels more laid-back and chill compared to its successor which feels sad and depressing, thanks to the different approach to ambient music. Each approach is nice to listen to and complements the respective story, environments and themes well, but I see myself leaning toward the laid-back type more.

Edited by Jabalous
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I constantly jump between the two as a favourite depending on what Im playing at the time lol. Personally, its too hard to split them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

RDR2 was overall far superior in terms of story and characters. RDR1 story was solid but too much of it was doing favors for wacky characters just to get some info. The formula became pretty tedious, I didn't really care about most of the characters (like West dickens, that Irish dude, the Mexican characters, the racist professor etc.). 

 

RDR2 focuses on the gang and the story feels more personal. Arthur has great character development while John stayed the same. Dutch is finally fleshed out (his part in RDR1 was already very intriguing) and is really compelling. Others like Hosea, Charles, Micah etc. are also memorable.

 

The open world is more immersive and the interactions with the NPC's + random events were done much better. Its just so fun to explore it

 

I think RDR1 has the better wild west vibe (based on Sergio Leone's movies clearly while RDR2 does its own thing) and a superior soundtrack but that's about it.

Edited by FanEu7
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2020 at 6:29 PM, Ryo256 said:

I understand your perspective but I don't share your feelings about it. If we think about Johnny K's death, I admitted before that it is effective in giving a strong introduction to Trevor. That is an example of how an important character gets a shocking low-value death. Problem with Lenny is that, the way it is done is sloppy as I argued earlier about the timing, the scripting and what not. Secondly Lenny isn't a character that matters. He's not written extensively, he doesn't play a major role in the story. You may like him but you know when you give a raw death to someone like that, it comes off forgettable. I guess the problem is that Rockstar thought too highly of their characters. Hence why some argue that Lenny's death was too early. Because R* didn't prep the goat enough for the slaughter.

 

 I disagree. Johnny's death was terribly written and poor shock value, they took a sh*t on an established character just to push the new "badass" MC. 

 

Lenny's death was done much better, it was shocking but made sense. And while he wasn't exactly a complex character I still liked him (as did most players, considering the reaction to his death) and it was really unexpected that he would just die like that without any cutscene.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FanEu7 said:

I disagree. Johnny's death was terribly written and poor shock value, they took a sh*t on an established character


Welp...... @billiejoearmstrong8 won't be happy.

 

1 hour ago, FanEu7 said:

just to push the new "badass" MC. 


That was the only part of it that you can consider "effective" is what I meant.
 

1 hour ago, FanEu7 said:

Lenny's death was done much better


Disagreed because of the following responses:

 

1 hour ago, FanEu7 said:

it was shocking but made sense.


Made sense sure. But it wasn't shocking at all considering Hosea died few minutes ago. RDR2 just doesn't give time to players to absorb death scenes. The bank job was definitely like this "Oh sh*t happened, oh that happened, and then this guy died.....oh and that guy just died and hey quickly run over here.....ah wait they doing this now wait wait what about this! Now you are on a boat!"
 

1 hour ago, FanEu7 said:

And while he wasn't exactly a complex character I still liked him


I liked him too but I didn't care for him because game didn't spend much time on him.
 

1 hour ago, FanEu7 said:

it was really unexpected that he would just die like that without any cutscene.


He died as he lived...…forgettable? 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
15 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:

 


Made sense sure. But it wasn't shocking at all considering Hosea died few minutes ago. RDR2 just doesn't give time to players to absorb death scenes. The bank job was definitely like this "Oh sh*t happened, oh that happened, and then this guy died.....oh and that guy just died and hey quickly run over here.....ah wait they doing this now wait wait what about this! Now you are on a boat!"


 

Doesn't that kind of work in this case though? The bank job goes to sh*t, people get killed and the rest of the characters are forced to move on quickly just to survive only to run into more crazy sh*t. The whole bank job and then Guarma ordeal is like a living nightmare that is mentally and physically exhausting for Arthur. In this particular case the player not having time to absorb the deaths mirrors what Arthur is experiencing. I think it's deliberate and effective. 

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ryo256 said:


Welp...... @billiejoearmstrong8 won't be happy.

 


That was the only part of it that you can consider "effective" is what I meant.
 


Disagreed because of the following responses:

 


Made sense sure. But it wasn't shocking at all considering Hosea died few minutes ago. RDR2 just doesn't give time to players to absorb death scenes. The bank job was definitely like this "Oh sh*t happened, oh that happened, and then this guy died.....oh and that guy just died and hey quickly run over here.....ah wait they doing this now wait wait what about this! Now you are on a boat!"
 


I liked him too but I didn't care for him because game didn't spend much time on him.
 


He died as he lived...…forgettable? 


 

 

But it was shocking because of that..they just killed off Hosea a few minutes ago so no one expects another death (especially not one without a cutscene). We don't need time to "absorb" each death, the point is that the Bank job is a huge failure and that's shown clearly with the deaths and everything being so hectic.

 

We got one main mission with him (one of the most memorable missions with Arthur and Lenny getting drunk) + a side mission that explores him a bit more. That's enough for a side character like him imho.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Doesn't that kind of work in this case though? The bank job goes to sh*t, people get killed and the rest of the characters are forced to move on quickly just to survive only to run into more crazy sh*t. The whole bank job and then Guarma ordeal is like a living nightmare that is mentally and physically exhausting for Arthur. In this particular case the player not having time to absorb the deaths mirrors what Arthur is experiencing. I think it's deliberate and effective. 

 

Spoiler

You had one job........to defend GTA V's writing on Johnny here and you failed that.


Two problems. One the mission will actually slow down for Hosea and Lenny. Secondly, I'm so much in a rush in the mission that I "ignore" what's going on. I don't think Arthur is ignoring the deaths though. Actually now that I think about what you wrote, it is.....really....not quite right lol. Some meta level sh*t or something.

 

10 minutes ago, FanEu7 said:

But it was shocking because of that..they just killed off Hosea a few minutes ago so no one expects another death


I mean.....I don't think that logic works. Hosea is given more focus in the story than Lenny so him dying would actually open to possibility of less important characters dying.

 

12 minutes ago, FanEu7 said:

We don't need time to "absorb" each death


Okay. If I don't "need" to absorb it then I don't care for the death scene. You may as well remove the scene altogether and it wouldn't change much.

 

13 minutes ago, FanEu7 said:

the point is that the Bank job is a huge failure and that's shown clearly with the deaths and everything being so hectic.


At this point, have him killed along with Hosea would accomplish the same thing.

 

14 minutes ago, FanEu7 said:

We got one main mission with him (one of the most memorable missions with Arthur and Lenny getting drunk)


Huge mission gap, I explained this earlier in this thread. By the time his death comes, he is not remembered much.
 

14 minutes ago, FanEu7 said:

+ a side mission that explores him a bit more. That's enough for a side character like him imho.


IMHO, it's not enough if you want me to give a damn about his death.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Red Dead Redemption is superior in story, customization, and atmosphere. John's my all time favorite protagonist, and I absolutely loved the Mexico segment. The gunplay and graphics of Red Dead 2 are better imo, for obvious reasons. Pushing those aside though, I prefer the first Redemption over the second.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of an odd thing to say but: my god you people exist. I thought I was the only one who preferred RDR1 to RDR2. I have always kind of been afraid to say it on the internet. Thank you for being the safe haven of discussion on this.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2021 at 9:35 PM, FanEu7 said:

 

But it was shocking because of that..they just killed off Hosea a few minutes ago so no one expects another death (especially not one without a cutscene). We don't need time to "absorb" each death, the point is that the Bank job is a huge failure and that's shown clearly with the deaths and everything being so hectic.

 

We got one main mission with him (one of the most memorable missions with Arthur and Lenny getting drunk) + a side mission that explores him a bit more. That's enough for a side character like him imho.

You forgot the mission when they steal weapons from Shady Belle, and more importantly the one when he led Dutch and Arthur to safety from Bronte's setup.

Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8

Lenny is great. I love him gracefully showing Dutch up here

 

 

He has a lot of other good camp interactions too

Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer 1 when I just want to chill for a few hours. I got it to where the family are back at the farm, but because I don't like Jack have basically stopped the story and just mess around. I love the hunting, and spend most of my time on that little hillock between Tall Trees and Great Plain where the road diverts either to the farm or to the trading post. Can get bears, boar, elk, goats, bobcats etc in that one location.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
Just now, sunhuntin said:

I prefer 1 when I just want to chill for a few hours. I got it to where the family are back at the farm, but because I don't like Jack have basically stopped the story and just mess around. I love the hunting, and spend most of my time on that little hillock between Tall Trees and Great Plain where the road diverts either to the farm or to the trading post. Can get bears, boar, elk, goats, bobcats etc in that one location.

 

I love to hunt in Tall Trees too, I spend hours just hunting. I was hunting exactly where you describe the other day, that road can get busy with people and when bears show up it's fun lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

I love to hunt in Tall Trees too, I spend hours just hunting. I was hunting exactly where you describe the other day, that road can get busy with people and when bears show up it's fun lol

 

I love covering the road with bears, causing trouble for the stagecoaches and hearing the comments from NPC's. Also the other road that goes to the trading post on the other side of the farm, just past where it crosses the railway tracks and goes up the hill a little.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
15 minutes ago, sunhuntin said:

 

I love covering the road with bears, causing trouble for the stagecoaches and hearing the comments from NPC's. Also the other road that goes to the trading post on the other side of the farm, just past where it crosses the railway tracks and goes up the hill a little.

 

Oh yeah there's often bears causing havoc there too lol. Or if you go near Blackwater along the southernmost approaching road you can see a lot of cougar, boar and wolf attacks going on.

 

Only thing I wish is that there were some more unique/valuable animals in New Austin and Nuevo Paraiso to give a good reason to go hunting there as well. Once you have access to pretty much every animal from those areas + bears, elk, bighorn sheep, beavers and eagles in West Elizabeth it kind of makes hunting in the others obsolete. Nuevo Paraiso especially, the only slightly dangerous animal is wolves and there's no really valuable ones there except wolves and very scarce bobcats, so I end up not spending much time in the wilderness there. Bit of a shame since I prefer the music in both of those areas to West Elizabeth. Other than that I love the hunting though. 

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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