Rockstar games confessions

[El Penguin Bobo]

15 minutes ago, SonOfLiberty said:

It breaks my heart that Max Payne 3 is the only R* game that isn't backwards compatible on XB1 when every other R* game is post 2005 (including Table Tennis)

Dumb decision by Rockstar for not adding Max Payne to BC. Maybe there's a good reason behind it but it still pisses me off how it isn't on there lol.

Edited May 4, 2020 by El Penguin Bobo

[Algonquin Assassin]

23 hours ago, El Penguin Bobo said:

Dumb decision by Rockstar for not adding Max Payne to BC. Maybe there's a good reason behind it but it still pisses me off how it isn't on there lol.

I've been reading some articles and apparently it has something to do with music licencing. I mean even if that's true it still sucks that we'll never see it. I guess I could always fire up my old Xbox 360 and play it, but the controller shat itself a couple of years ago.

 

Anyway...

 

-Vice City is currently the only R* game I have on PC. Every other game is on console, but I technically own 4 versions of Vice City. My original PS2 version I got in 2002, a digital PS3 version, PS4 and the PC one.

 

-When I got RDR1 in 2010 I bought the limited edition that came with the original soundtrack plus all other in games items, but when I upgraded to a new 360 I didn't transfer all of my save data over so I lost all of that. I ended up buying all the in games again, but not the soundtrack. I'm a f*cking idiot. If I didn't redeem the code it wouldn't have been a problem.

 

 

[ROCKSTAR MANIC]

9 hours ago, El Penguin Bobo said:

Dumb decision by Rockstar for not adding Max Payne to BC. Maybe there's a good reason behind it but it still pisses me off how it isn't on there lol.

The Rockstar Pass for MP3 is about 8 bucks plus tax for Gold users on xbox. I bought it this weekend and I've playing team deathmatch, it isnt full lobbies about usually 6 to 10 gamers playing. Sometimes theres full lobbies. It gets lit like the old days, but I feel there are modders, but it doesn't break the game anyway.

 

hahaha!! @SonOfLiberty I forgot too the music soundtrack for MP3 that came with collectors box, I forgot about that!! till you mentioned it. I too didnt redeem the code!!!!

[ChengizVlad09]

My ultimate comprehension of Rockstar Games is way darker than my words can ever describe, actually. I'm not disappointed with them despite their trickery being so see through and cheap, often so overlooked, what's even more, glorified. Far from it, I found my peace knowing they suck real hard. Just in a bit more subtle, naive looking way compared to the EAs, Activisions, Bethesdas, or every other fallen giant of the AAA gaming industry. From whatever angle I try to tackle that particular topic, in explaining WHY they actually suck gigantic balls, there's always a certain feeling I could have add some more or phrase it a bit better in order to get my point across. Of course, next to a constant fear that my broken English simply isn't that expressive to adequately put it all into the proper perspective. Trading in the real gameplay for whatever cheap or expensive trick is a blasphemy of the video gaming world that no one does better than Rockstar themselves. I get pulled so deep in to the dark thinking about it sometimes, I can clearly see them going bankrupt, failing hard, massacring everything good they did over the years. It doesn't make me happy, it just feels justified an righteous. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by ChengizVlad09

[Nappy]

is there a reason you don't like gta IV as much as you like III. The games are so similar plus gta IV has better physics and graphics.....just asking...

[Tao Cheng]

-

Edited August 28, 2020 by Tao Cheng

[ChengizVlad09]

@Payne Assuming the question was meant for me, there are quite a few reasons behind it. Not really sure why that might be of any special interest for you, but here are some of them

Let's consider this to be another confession of sorts.

 

I think it is tied to both in-game and "out-game" related things. On one side it would be the game engine related stuff - among many - while on the other side, let's say it's the general approach R* had when they made GTA III compared to approach with IV.

 

GTA IV undoubtedly has more advanced physics, totally agree, it's a no-brainer. But, I really doubt R.A.G.E/Euphoria of IV are ultimately better than Renderware of III. Being more advanced, doesn't always equals to being better. If it makes any sense, I like to use one analogy to describe and compare the two engines. Rage/Euphoria is a modern super car with, let's say 600 horse power and the top speed of 300 km/h. Randerware on the other hand is a classic sporty old timer with half the power and the top speed of 250 km/h. I think that with half the power at its disposal, RW is actually able to offer much more and at a much more efficient level, only it's not that apparent at first glance. You'll win a drag race with Rage, sure, but better handling with similar acceleration of RW is what I would choose for the tricky race track - something every GTA should be, a tricky race track, not some linear, over-simplified game. The only time in all those years where Rage and Euphoria really shinned was exactly in GTA IV, more precisely in two particular aspects: weapon impacts and hitting pedestrians with cars, or eventually seeing them tumble down the stairs. Except for the weapon physics, animations and impacts, the rest aren't quite gameplay changing. It's a step forward, but nothing essential. Subjectively and personally I lean more toward, neatly executed, limited number of "scripted" animations for every scenario, faster paced dynamics and simplicity. Everything in III is more action-packed, rigged to blow and tight as a spring. Better connected, despite lesser in nature. Rage is way more complex, but its complexity is in many occasions, an unnecessary overhead, a burden of sorts. The best example is ever present input lag and wobbly, heavily animated, slow stream that many people, for some reason, like to consider to be " realistic ", which necessarily isn't. Where RW is simplistic, Rage is simplified, I think there's a big difference. Flaws like these are the most pronounced in things connected to driving mechanics. Both III and IV are quite easy to master, despite not looking so. You know everything about what they have to offer in driving department in only couple of hours of driving, or even less. It just doesn't seem so with IV, it's like there are bunch of stuff you need to learn to be able to drive at a level. You don't. GTA IV is a classic arcade that pretends to be a simulation. There wouldn't be any problems with that if Rockstar did remotely a decent job with it.Truth to be told, IV is so bad at it, that everything it uses to disguise itself as such - wobbly, heavy, boat like cars that understeer and brake tragically, which isn't 'real' at all btw - is completely unnecessary, redundant and ironically, does exactly nothing to make that game even remotely feel like a sim, or in turn offers anything positive from that world. As a matter of fact, it renders it as a bad arcade experience even. With III, it is what it is, there's nothing to add, nothing to hide. It's a classic arcade.

 

I really like almost stylized, cartoony appearance of all 3DU games. When done right, such approach can do wonders, since it's far less easier to exaggerate and put a stronger emphasis on visual objects. Great "life-like" graphics, will at some point start to suffer, due to the technology advance and it is at the risk of looking silly eventually. Going all in with "real" graphics leaves less maneuvering space for artistic exaggeration, since the main intention is to portray something exactly as it is in real life. Nevertheless, GTA IV has one of the most beautiful graphics out there and it's the feature I found really likable to this day.

 

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by ChengizVlad09

[Nappy]

Well uhh...about gta III being more fast paced....i gotta say it definetly is and i like that, i guess gta IV did that a bit bad with controls and driving animations being too overdone. Gta V offers some fast paced action but its ultimately scripted so i don’t find it so enjoyable....

[ROCKSTAR MANIC]

I know its random. What the f*ck ever happened to the social club exclusive Audi R8 from MCLA?? i know the servers closed, and I know i had the car in my garage. Why isnt it there??

[Sunglasses]

19 hours ago, Tao Cheng said:

I was extremely upset that Midnight Club 2 and Max Payne is missing from the Rockstar Game Launcher.

Upset about Midnight Club II as well. I periodically check Steam just to see if it's available for purchasing and it still isn't. I'd really like it back again!

[FAH-Q]

[WXSTER]

i find the nerdy girl in bully attractive lmao i dunno

[Niobium]

On 4/14/2020 at 2:01 PM, Niobium said:

i didn't hate playing as jack marston

here's an even bigger confession.... i preferred to play as jack marston over zombie john marston. i liked undead nightmare, but when i beat the game and saw that john became a zombie i was like "wtf, i want to play as a human"

Edited May 7, 2020 by Niobium

[Algonquin Assassin]

- I can't stand characters like Lamar, Yusuf Amir, OG Log etc who are obvious "comedic" characters turned up to a factor of 10. The funny thing is I don't have a problem with Roman, Brucie etc. I just don't find them as annoying and/or irritating despite their intention is to be comedic relief.

 

-I'm not too fussed if GTA VI is set in the past or present. The time period doesn't matter to me as long as the story's well written and interesting.

 

-If there's a RDR3 I want the protagonist to be a free black slave (kind of like Django Unchained) and for it to be set during the West's beginnings or peak. Please no more dying West or anymore about the Van Der Linde gang. RDR3 needs to be its own thing.

 

 

[Zello]

On 5/8/2020 at 10:27 AM, Algonquin Assassin said:

be set during the West's beginnings or peak. Please no more dying West or anymore about the Van Der Linde gang. RDR3 needs to be its own thing.

Same. I really hated that they had two games during the end of the West. I want to see something in the 1870s/80's maybe even earlier than that. If we get Dutch and the gang again I'm going to be angry. We need new characters.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Zello

[Excalibur Voltaire]

RDR2 is the only R* game I legitimately purchased

 

I always feel the only strength modern R* has is that they make high-quality Singleplayer games (except V to an extend). Other than that, they're no different from your typical modern gaming company, such as being greedy, out-of-touch with their fanbase, being anti-consumer, DRM, focusing on Online, and their game being broken and downgraded (with each patches for R* case)

[Algonquin Assassin]

I preferred playing as Jack in RDR1 than John in RDR2.

 

Maybe it's because I vastly prefer Arthur to John, but playing as John in the epilogue in RDR2 feels... weird. It's also strange how he pretty much inherits all of Arthur's assets including clothing. Wearing Arthur's clothes as John is just bizarre lol. Also exploring New Austin feels strange because in RDR1 it's a reasonable assumption that John hasn't visted many of those place before like Tumbleweed, Gaptooth Ridge etc. I guess that's one of the difficulties making a prequel.

 

Jack on the other hand feels like his own character. Although it's still odd that he can complete stranger tasks John had started which is weird when you go back to them and the people don't even seem to realise they're talking to a different person.