I have mixed feelings about GTA IV.

[Tsoi_Boy]

Don't get me wrong its still a great game, but the missions are just.. I don't know.. unimaginative and repetitive? The whole, go to point A, wait for instructions and then go through a scripted car chase where you shoot at the car until the mission passed theme plays. Now I love the realistic and well thought out hits (such as killing Goldberg), but I feel like the others could have been a bit more creative and less linear. For example in Hitman, you can take multiple approaches to missions. Sure it would take longer, and there would be less missions, but they'd be a lot more memorable and fun. I'm a quality over quantity fan. The only hitman missions I remember was that Lure mission and that one where you had to kill the person in the apartment, which you can do by climbing the crane opposite. Oh and of course the Flatline mission too. 

 

And for a game so entrenched with realism, missions where a single guy shoots through 20 people (Hostile Negotiation) or kills 9 people for a half-assed reason (Portrait of a Killer), or the multiple variations of 'get a cop car' and proceed to search for and kill a suspect just feel so half-arsed and over-milked. Sometimes the mission is mostly a cutscene, and everything is just overly-cinematic and repetitive. I feel like a spectator, and there is no customizable options. And the internet feels like a missed opportunity to me. Sure the websites were fun to browse, but why not have made it so you can buy cars. There was a car store on the website, but you couldn't buy from it? Buying themes and ringtones was great though, and the phone feature was well implemented. I really wanted the RPG San Andreas mechanics to be included too. The characters, like Brucie and Manny were annoying as hell, and Manny's actual missions were over the top storyline-wise. I mean having all those people killed over a f*cking TV show? It would have been better making him a drug lord who wanted you to clear out rival warehouses, and Elizabeta could of have you killing Manny and then transporting the bodies to the organ doctor.  

 

Now for some positives:

- The taxi, tram and train systems were implemented well, and made travelling through L.C. less of a chore.

- The side missions were world class. The Fixers Assassinations, the drug deliveries, and drunk bowling will always be great. And the darts and TV shows were fun additions too. They also cut out the needless and repetitive paramedic, pizza boy and pimping missions too and had clearly spent time adding polish to the good side missions.  

- You could rob a store, and go on races and heli rides. I just wished store robberies were a bigger part of the game. Sad that GTA got rid of those burglary missions from SA.

-Vladivostock FM.

- The ability to spare people. 

- The internet was amusing and fun to browse. 

- Three Leaf Clover. 

[Mindshower]

I can see why missions like Portrait of a Killer would come off as a random shooting gallery mission, however the looser leash means I can get on top of the building across the street and take them out with a sniper rifle. I can also call up Dwayne's back up to make it a less lopsided gun fight.

 

I always saw Manny as a parody of the scummy wannabe reality TV wave of the 2000s, think bum fights or something equally terrible. 

[vcfan1991]

GTA 4 was kewl DGMW don't get me wrong, I liked it, played the whole thang but dang I just can't excuse the car handling physics. I mean, you get used to it, but holy heck was that like a bad joke or something? Otherwise ya, kewl game. 

[Americana]

Weird, you can complete most missions however you want to.

 

Yes, you have to kill people in this game. You also have to drive a lot. I mean, that's the point - and Rockstar delivered a lot of awesome missions, thanks to which I can feel like a real criminal.

[Algonquin Assassin]

4 hours ago, vcfan1991 said:

GTA 4 was kewl DGMW don't get me wrong, I liked it, played the whole thang but dang I just can't excuse the car handling physics. I mean, you get used to it, but holy heck was that like a bad joke or something? Otherwise ya, kewl game. 

 

No. The driving physics are the best in any GTA and any open world/sandbox game period.

 

@Tsoi_Boy A lot of good points, but there are some I disagree on. I disliked the RPG mechanics in San Andreas and I'm glad this wasn't included in GTA IV. I didn't want Niko artificially weakened and being forced to improve his "skills". His more detailed backstory created a blueprint where his skills were already pre-set. Not to mention it took the tedium out of going to the gym and whatnot.

 

As for the missions while I get the reason why some people may not like them I've never had any major issues with them. The only thing I wish R* included was a suppressor as a number of missions are suited for a more stealthy approach, but I love the majority of them because the shooting mechanics are so brilliant so shootouts never get old. I hated shootouts in the 3D era because the mechanics were so poor and lacking compared to contemporary games.

 

GTA IV fixed that whilst also allowing for some more open ended missions too. The reason I've replayed GTA IV 15 times is it has insane amounts of replay value. Love playing through the missions and still sometimes stumbling across an approach I never noticed before. IMO the missions may seem less inviting on the surface, but most of their charm comes through sticking with them and exploring alternative approaches like in "Dust Off". I bet most people just go in guns blazing to steal the helicopter without thinking you can do this by hopping over the fence and jumping in the water to swim under the walkway and steal the helicopter like that without needing to fire a single shot or in "Undress To Kill" you can let them escape and go on a chase or block the doors.

 

Then there's "Dining Out" where you could just let Kim get into his car and chase him down or think outside of the square and use one of Packie's bombs to plant under his car before going into the restaurant. There's so many more examples as per my GTA IV missions alternatives thread I made several years ago.

 

I guess my point is I get how some people don't like most of the missions because they're not "creatively" big action set pieces, but at the same time I feel like with GTA IV R* wanted the players to find their own way without necessarily spoon feeding them.  

Edited April 10, 2021 by Algonquin Assassin

[vcfan1991]

1 minute ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

 

No. The driving physics are the best in any GTA and any open world/sandbox game period.

 

Spoiler

Bruh....

 

[Algonquin Assassin]

Just now, vcfan1991 said:

 

  Hide contents

Bruh....

 

 

What do you mean "bruh"?

[Payne]

I don’t see Gta IV trying to be realistic. It may be more grounded than some other titles, but realistic? Just don’t see it.

The game is cinematic but I don’t feel that it’s cinematic to the point where i say “f*ck this sh*t”. I feel like this is a cinematic game where its cinematography doesn’t f*ck with gameplay.

 

Kinda like you, i feel that money in this game is useless.

 

[billiejoearmstrong8]

It's true that most missions have quite a simple structure but honestly you're allowed more freedom in how you complete them than you get in any other GTA game. That's the trade off. Some are totally linear but most allow for a good amount of creativity and variation - it's even fun to fail them different ways because there's many, many different unique fail phonecalls and cutscenes. There's often different ways to approach/enter/escape from a location (just one example: in Escuela of the Streets you don't have to break in the door of the warehouse as it guides you to, instead you can break the window and go in through the office, or go round the back and climb on the roof, grabbing the SMG that's up there on your way, and drop in through the open skylight). You listed a few but there's way more than that where you can do things differently in various ways. You don't have the strict restrictions where you fail for "leaving the area"/driving down the wrong street/doing anything they didn't tell you to the way it is in GTA V so you can get creative. There's other variables like the fact you can shoot allies so there's always the risk of accidentally hitting them during a shootout, and virtually never being forced to use a specific weapon, not to mention the physics, combat and ped AI being awesomely complex and variable. Just little things like that which add up to the gameplay being more free. And you can call Roman for a taxi (Mohammed doesn't mind if you have a wanted level), Brucie for a helicopter ride and later other friends for armed backup/a car bomb, or try out calling for police backup using the police computer to mix things up in different ways. 

 

Also, since it was the first HD era game with a lot of new features and controls there are quite a lot of missions with tutorial elements early on. Three Leaf Clover is about half way through, if that's where you'll at I think you'll find missions are more free from there without tutorial elements to hold them back. GTA IV is a game where thinking outside the box and being creative in missions is rewarding. It doesn't necessarily hand it to you on a plate but it gives you the freedom to make missions more interesting yourself, and that's satisfying.

Edited April 10, 2021 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Flymystical-DJ]

Im in the same boat. I love love love a lot of this game but the experience is lacking in cohesion. They wanted so much realism but they didn't have the balls to go all the way with it like they would 11 years later in Red Dead 2. You're left with something that plays like Red Dead 2 but has the gameplay of GTA SA. It's always at odds with itself. 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Flymystical-DJ

[Algonquin Assassin]

1 hour ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

Im in the same boat. I love love love a lot of this game but the experience is lacking in cohesion. They wanted so much realism but they didn't have the balls to go all the way with it like they would 11 years later in Red Dead 2. You're left with something that plays like Red Dead 2 but has the gameplay of GTA SA. It's always at odds with itself. 

 

 

Not really sure what you mean by that they didn’t have the balls. It was as much realism as they could get away with for a GTA game. Then again some people think it’s too “realistic” and not “fun” so I guess it comes down to individual Interpretation.
 

Red Dead Redemption 2 wasn’t even a figment of the imagination back then. Besides it’s a different franchise. Just because they both have a R* logo on the cover it doesn’t really mean much. Different goals, phliosophies etc.

 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Algonquin Assassin

[B Dawg]

I wouldn't want GTA IV to be like RDR2 anyway lol.

[Flymystical-DJ]

26 minutes ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

Not really sure what you mean by that they didn’t have the balls. It was as much realism as they could get away with for a GTA game. Then again some people think it’s too “realistic” and not “fun” so I guess it comes down to individual Interpretation.
 

Red Dead Redemption 2 wasn’t even a figment of the imagination back then. Besides it’s a different franchise. Just because they both have a R* logo on the cover it doesn’t really mean much. Different goals, phliosophies etc.

 

If you're unwilling to go past what you can "get away" with you lack balls. They put profit in front of artistic integraty. I'm not judging them you gotta eat but I'm also not going to deny it.

 

Also Rockstar has continually improved their products so, yea, Red Dead wasn't a thing when GTA IV but that doesn't mean it isn't connected. Red Dead 2 very much utilizes and expands upon their open world formula. As GTA 5 did with what they learned from Red Dead 1.

[billiejoearmstrong8]

I agree with @Payne that it's less about "realism" and more about being grounded. It doesn't pretend to be a real life simulator (in fact it removed many of those extras that were in San Andreas eg having to eat, being able to customise your appearance a lot etc). It just picked a theme/style and stuck with it through grounded/not completely outlandish missions, and additional content that fits the story/setting/protagonist.

 

27 minutes ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

If you're unwilling to go past what you can "get away" with you lack balls. They put profit in front of artistic integraty. I'm not judging them you gotta eat but I'm also not going to deny it.

 

Also Rockstar has continually improved their products so, yea, Red Dead wasn't a thing when GTA IV but that doesn't mean it isn't connected. Red Dead 2 very much utilizes and expands upon their open world formula. As GTA 5 did with what they learned from Red Dead 1.

 

What did you expect them to do include that they didn't exactly? In what way did they put profit in front of artistic integrity? You understand that technical/space limitations are a thing right? IV is a huge step up from previous GTA games in terms of graphics, physics, writing and general level of detail and went in a new direction with the tone, I don't think it held back.

Edited April 10, 2021 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Algonquin Assassin]

15 minutes ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

If you're unwilling to go past what you can "get away" with you lack balls. They put profit in front of artistic integraty. I'm not judging them you gotta eat but I'm also not going to deny it.

 

Also Rockstar has continually improved their products so, yea, Red Dead wasn't a thing when GTA IV but that doesn't mean it isn't connected. Red Dead 2 very much utilizes and expands upon their open world formula. As GTA 5 did with what they learned from Red Dead 1.

Except it was the most realistic game they made at the time and as such that’s what I’m judging it by. You’re speaking purely in hindsight. 
 

I know that the Red Dead games expand on the open world formula, but that’s not what I meant.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Algonquin Assassin

[Ryo256]

Looking at GTA IV as "realistic" is an over simplification IMO. The ragdolls physics goes for a goofy fun experience, missions like having Little Jacob go on a helicopter ride just so you can snipe another helicopter midway with a rocket launcher does not fit within realism from my perspective. Heck even RDR2 has a mission where Arthur is coughing so hard and next moment he is fighting off a group of military trained soldiers with only Charles as backup just to save one captain. Realism isn't what's going on with these games. The key word is immersion and that is what both RDR2 and GTA IV did right.

GTA IV is not realistic IMO, it is more "consistent" i.e the physics are consistent throughout the game for most part, creating a different yet fair experience. Similarly the gameplay stays consistent from the first arc to the last. GTA IV knows what it is and that's exactly what you are going to get. It has a level of confidence in its gameplay loop that is sadly lost on recent titles because they rely on gimmicks and one-time mechanics to provide unique experiences which I find, personally to be shallow, sacrificing replay value in the process.

Edited April 10, 2021 by Ryo256

[billiejoearmstrong8]

Keeping somewhat in the tone of GTA and not making it as serious or with as little humour and satire or as slow paced as RDR (which didn't even exist yet...) has nothing to do with "lacking balls", it's a legitimate artistic choice. They switched up the tone more than they ever had before, doesn't mean they had to completely abandon the GTA style. Even at its most serious GTA is more lighthearted than some other Rockstar games and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

I think IV is very well balanced in that regard, I enjoy its humour and more fun/outlandish/free gameplay aspects and wouldn't want it to be dryer/more slow paced and bogged down than it is. RDR is a slower paced gaming experience than GTA, what works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other.

Edited May 25, 2021 by billiejoearmstrong8

[iiCriminnaaL]

GTA IV is somewhat more realistic than the other titles in the franchise in so many ways, but we aren't implying that it's as realistic as many people make it out to be. It's "realistic" in terms of GTA and probably somewhat open world games in general. Like Ryo256 mentioned, it's more consistent and immersive, as well as more "believable", even though it's not necessarily that "realistic".

Edited April 10, 2021 by iiCriminnaaL

[Algonquin Assassin]

9 hours ago, iiCriminnaaL said:

GTA IV is somewhat more realistic than the other titles in the franchise in so many ways, but we aren't implying that it's as realistic as many people make it out to be. It's "realistic" in terms of GTA and probably somewhat open world games in general. Like Ryo256 mentioned, it's more consistent and immersive, as well as more "believable", even though it's not necessarily that "realistic".

 

I think GTA IV is more realistic when it comes to its details, world building etc, but at its heart it's still a bombastic and light hearted GTA game. However that's why I love it. One moment I can be soaking in all sights and sounds of the city. The next I can let loose and lol at peds flying all over the place if I run them over, fire a rocket launcher into a crowd and so on.

 

No game is truly "realistic" unless it's a dedicated simulator or something, but I don't get the impression R* why trying to make GTA IV the most realistic game ever. More like a passion project with a different direction in mind. It's like Red Dead Redemption 2. It contains many realistic/immersive elements, but then again in this game we can literally come across UFOs, vampires and other crazy sh*t to remind us it's still a video game. 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Algonquin Assassin

[KGBeast]

GTA IV has mixed feelings about you. 

[Flymystical-DJ]

13 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

What did you expect them to do include that they didn't exactly? In what way did they put profit in front of artistic integrity? You understand that technical/space limitations are a thing right? IV is a huge step up from previous GTA games in terms of graphics, physics, writing and general level of detail and went in a new direction with the tone, I don't think it held back.

 

More little things to look at and do, something Red Dead nailed. The game has one of the slowest default speed in any RS game to this day yet doesn't even give the player anything meaningful to see or interact with. Sure there's strangers and freaks but they are labelled on the map when you get near so I do not think you aren't meant to randomly walk into them. And even if it did there is nothing in between them to keep you wondering or interested. 

 

The game goes so in depth with the friendship mechanics yet they exist solely for minigames and dialogue. Neither of which tie into the core elements of the game (tie into the story sure but the gameplay? not at all) I honestly think the game could have benefited from a hunger system purely so there is more meaning to taking a friend out to eat beyond skipping the minigame. It's uncanny. You can walk around town with them but as I said in my first point you aren't going to find anything. I have to go out of my way to take them pigeon hunting with me because they went weirdly in depth with a certain feature without having it tie into any gameplay elements. You can see this in many other areas of the game like with car washes and internet cafes.

 

The simple addition of a one star wanted level for brandishing a gun in sight of police would have made the constant advertisements related to gun control something I actually care about. Street laws would have gone a long way to. They added in toll booths, but no punishment for passing a red light? Do they want me to drive fast or do they want me to drive slow and follow the rules? 

 

There should have been a button to talk to Peds. This one makes no sense to me. Would have gone a long way to make the city feel like something I could interact with, not just shoot.

 

More stuff to buy is one I think we can agree with as it doesn't just effect the "immersive" side of GTA4 but the "wild" side too

 

Basically I feel they wanted a huge chunk of this game to be about "being there" and making the city and world feel real and alive yet they did almost nothing with the gameplay to promote that feeling besides slow down the walk speed. At it's core it's a classic GTA game and the only thing you are incentivized to do is classic GTA stuff. It makes everything in-between feel even more fake which makes the slowed walk speed almost insulting.

13 hours ago, Algonquin Assassin said:

Except it was the most realistic game they made at the time and as such that’s what I’m judging it by. You’re speaking purely in hindsight. 
 

I know that the Red Dead games expand on the open world formula, but that’s not what I meant.

I'm not speaking in hindsight I'm speaking in fulfillment of intention. I feel they intended GTA4 to be a game that immerses the player into its world and makes them feel like a hitman and, gameplay wise, it completely fails at that. It wants the player to soak in the world but never rewards the player for doing so which actively incentivizes the player to do the opposite.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Flymystical-DJ

[Flymystical-DJ]

13 hours ago, Ryo256 said:

Looking at GTA IV as "realistic" is an over simplification IMO. The ragdolls physics goes for a goofy fun experience, missions like having Little Jacob go on a helicopter ride just so you can snipe another helicopter midway with a rocket launcher does not fit within realism from my perspective. Heck even RDR2 has a mission where Arthur is coughing so hard and next moment he is fighting off a group of military trained soldiers with only Charles as backup just to save one captain. Realism isn't what's going on with these games. The key word is immersion and that is what both RDR2 and GTA IV did right.

GTA IV is not realistic IMO, it is more "consistent" i.e the physics are consistent throughout the game for most part, creating a different yet fair experience. Similarly the gameplay stays consistent from the first arc to the last. GTA IV knows what it is and that's exactly what you are going to get. It has a level of confidence in its gameplay loop that is sadly lost on recent titles because they rely on gimmicks and one-time mechanics to provide unique experiences which I find, personally to be shallow, sacrificing replay value in the process.

I believe I mis-spoke when I used "realistic". I think you're all correct in saying GTA 4 was not trying to be realistic per-say. It's trying to be immersive. However, being immersive requires some realism, especially in a real world setting. While GTA4 constantly presents itself as realistic the only things it does to promote realism through gameplay is lower the players health and speed. I don't think that is nearly enough. 

13 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Keeping somewhat in the tone of GTA and not making it as serious/devoid of humour and satire/slow paced as RDR (which didn't even exist yet...) has nothing to do with "lacking balls", it's a legitimate artistic choice. They switched up the tone more than they ever had before, doesn't mean they had to completely abandon the GTA style. Even at its most serious GTA is more lighthearted than some other Rockstar games and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

I think IV is very well balanced in that regard, I enjoy its humour and more fun/outlandish/free gameplay aspects and wouldn't want it to be dryer/more slow paced and bogged down than it is. RDR is a slower paced gaming experience than GTA, what works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other.

GTA4 didn't need to be slower to be more immersive/realistic. It just needed more gameplay elements that promote that feeling.

 

I want to reiterate I love GTA 4. The story is amazing and, visually, the city is stunning. I love the character focus on different cultures and the missions, isolated from the open world, are mostly very immersive. The choice system, while somewhat lacking, goes a very long way to increasing replay value. The side missions are also bar none the best of any RS game to date. The driving is also the best of the series, fight me on that one next.

 

My problem is just the lack of cohesive experience that leads me to being burnt out. I can walk around the city for 30-60 minutes before feeling kinda sad. The city is dead. It can offer me nothing nor can I do much of anything to interact with it, it lacks life. This makes the missions suffer too. After speeding 90mph past half the dead city (or teleporting via cab) im suddenly expected to slow down, take in a chill, drawn out cutscene where Niko meets with someone, and get "immersed" It's constant whiplash that makes me relegate my play sessions to a couple hours a month. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by Flymystical-DJ

[Algonquin Assassin]

3 hours ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

 

I'm not speaking in hindsight I'm speaking in fulfillment of intention. I feel they intended GTA4 to be a game that immerses the player into its world and makes them feel like a hitman and, gameplay wise, it completely fails at that. It wants the player to soak in the world but never rewards the player for doing so which actively incentivizes the player to do the opposite.

Our experiences are completely different then because I can always find  something that interests me and sucks me into it. The city is not “dead”. Not even close.

 

Even after 13 years and literally 100s if not 1000s of hours exploring the map from top to bottom and every single nook and cranny imaginable I still come back for more. If that’s not “rewarding” I don’t know what is.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Algonquin Assassin

[billiejoearmstrong8]

5 hours ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

 

 

My problem is just the lack of cohesive experience that leads me to being burnt out. I can walk around the city for 30-60 minutes before feeling kinda sad. The city is dead. It can offer me nothing nor can I do much of anything to interact with it, it lacks life. This makes the missions suffer too. After speeding 90mph past half the dead city (or teleporting via cab) im suddenly expected to slow down, take in a chill, drawn out cutscene where Niko meets with someone, and get "immersed" It's constant whiplash that makes me relegate my play sessions to a couple hours a month. 

 

I guess I've just experienced it differently. To me IV has the most alive feeling city in GTA. It's bustling with life and the peds have varied and complex behaviour that makes them loads of fun to interact/mess with. It's certainly more alive and detailed than any GTA city that came before it. And in my view V feels more dead, with many details and interiors cut so it feels more like a fake movie set with people just standing around (when they're not ridiculously being scared/angry/hostile/calling the cops just because you're standing/walking there). I don't know what GTA you're thinking of where the city has more going on?

 

6 hours ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

 

 

I'm not speaking in hindsight I'm speaking in fulfillment of intention. I feel they intended GTA4 to be a game that immerses the player into its world and makes them feel like a hitman and, gameplay wise, it completely fails at that. It wants the player to soak in the world but never rewards the player for doing so which actively incentivizes the player to do the opposite.

 

I'm not sure how this is the case. In GTA IV they specifically cut out elements that aren't in keeping with the criminal/hitman theme (Niko isn't spending time on haircuts/fashion/tattoos/modding his car/being an ambulance/firetruck/train/pizza bike driver/flying around with a jetpack/diving for oysters etc) and kept/expanded on ones that are (assassinations/vehicle thefts + infinite ability to steal and sell cars/most wanted/vigilante/drug delivery/doing criminal tasks for random characters - and believeable activities for his downtime like hanging out with friends/girlfriends drinking/grabbing a burger/playing darts/pool/bowling, visiting strip clubs and prostitutes, driving a taxi for his cousin/watching tv/using internet etc). Again, which GTA game did a better job of this?

Edited April 11, 2021 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Payne]

I could like going to a barber. I think it’s very casual for someone to get a haircut.

[Ryo256]

6 hours ago, Flymystical-DJ said:

I believe I mis-spoke when I used "realistic". I think you're all correct in saying GTA 4 was not trying to be realistic per-say. It's trying to be immersive. However, being immersive requires some realism, especially in a real world setting. While GTA4 constantly presents itself as realistic the only things it does to promote realism through gameplay is lower the players health and speed. I don't think that is nearly enough. 

GTA4 didn't need to be slower to be more immersive/realistic. It just needed more gameplay elements that promote that feeling.

I think you still aren't getting it. Immersion does not always require realism, it requires consistency. There are games like World of Warcraft and Skyrim that people find to be immersive but there is nothing realistic about fighting a giant flying magic lizard. No, what makes these games and other, immersive is because they are CONSISTENT to the point where a player accepts their rules and is able to suspend belief long enough to adopt the world as their own. Heck why do you think people complain about scripted sequences, bugs and glitches as immersion-breaking? Because they break the flow of the game, they make the game inconsistent, not following the rules the game introduced.

Now I would argue that GTA SA has added features like hunger and how overeating can give you weight or cause you vomit, now I would based on that, argue, GTA SA is trying to be realistic? No that would be a poor argument IMO, for GTA SA being realistic is a minor goal just as like it is for GTA IV and even for RDR2 because Chapter 5 isn't what I would call realistic as just as Niko jumping off a bike mid-air to climb on to a helicopter in the final mission. 

Games like these follow another goal, Rule of Cool, Rule of Drama, Rule of Comedy, Rule of Tragedy, Rule of Consistency blah blah the goal of these games is many, they differ based on what each game is trying to achieve in its given scene. For a game to be truly realistic, it would not give up realism for the sake of these rules and thankfully, I am grateful that barely any game follow Rule of Realism because most of my protagonists would be dead before we even finish the first arc. Who wants to escape real world just to enter another IMO, boring realistic world? We want fantasy in our games and that's what game dev try to deliver in most games. Sometime they may sprinkle a little realism here and there but that is not the ultimate goal, it is just an excuse for you to digest the fantasy that the game is trying to offer.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Ryo256

[billiejoearmstrong8]

1 hour ago, Payne said:

I could like going to a barber. I think it’s very casual for someone to get a haircut.

 

Sure but it's not like it's just getting a trim because your hair has grown. It means having a range of hairstyles available. It works well in V because Michael would want to look stylish as a rich guy in Rockford Hills, Trevor is secretly a hipster and Franklin doesn't want a yee yee ass haircut, and in SA because CJ would also want a cool haircut and wacky/over the top stuff like a pink mohawk fits that game. But I can't see Niko caring about getting more than the most basic cut. It wouldn't be a terrible thing if it was included (they could've just had very simple styles) but I can understand them not considering it worthwhile enough to include.

Edited April 11, 2021 by billiejoearmstrong8

[Algonquin Assassin]

1 hour ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

Sure but it's not like it's just getting a trim because your hair has grown. It means having a range of hairstyles available. It works well in V because Michael would want to look stylish as a rich guy in Rockford Hills, Trevor is secretly a hipster and Franklin doesn't want a yee yee ass haircut, and in SA because CJ would also want a cool haircut and wacky/over the top stuff like a pink mohawk fits that game. But I can't see Niko caring about getting more than the most basic cut. It wouldn't be a terrible thing if it was included (they could've just had very simple styles) but I can understand them not considering it worthwhile enough to include.

I’m pretty sure in the BETA barbers were going to be included, but they got cut (no pun intended).
 

Even in GTA V the protagonists really don’t have a lot of hairstyles individually so maybe they thought it was a waste of resources to include barbers if it was going to have 2-3 hairstyles or something like that and there’s no way they were going to include all the quirky/weird sh*t from San Andreas.

[Guns a-Blazin]

@Tsoi_Boy

 

Yes, GTA IV does have these repetitive "Drive to Location A" and "Chase Person B until they die" missions but so does GTA VC, SA and V to name a few. I mean, nearly every GTA game (up to date) have these type of missions so I don't see how this puts IV in the spotlight? Also, the best thing about the missions is the fact that they have freedom and variety. Here are a few examples of missions that have optional approaches/outcomes:

 

• Bull In A China Shop - You can smash the shop window any way you want e.g. a car, fist, gun etc...
• Derelict Target - Just call the cops and let them kill the bounty targets for you
• Holland Nights - Instead of going in all guns blazing, you can just climb up the nearby crane and snipe Clarence from there

 

I disagree about the cinematic stuff. Yes ok, GTA IV has a lot of cutscenes but they hardly interfere with the gameplay. In fact, IV put it's gameplay at the forefront of the game which makes it 10x times better in my opinion. Saying that though, R* have clearly focused on the cinematic narrative side of things in both GTA V and RDR2 so 

 

I agree about everything else.

[Aquamaniac]

What I did not like about GTA IV was the repetitive pattern of killing your former bosses. Niko is a cool character but the story is mediocre at best. Maybe for that reason I quite liked TBOGT since it does not follow this pattern, TLAD is even worse in this matter, even as a LOST member you kill dozens of other LOST, good that Trevor put an end to that misery.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Aquamaniac