Rank the 3D era games(besides Advance)

[zlzgr]

Gta III, Vice City, San Andreas, Libert City Stories and Vice City Stories

Rank from worst to best/best to worst in you opinion.

 

For me it's

Liberty City Stories(I am currently playing it, done 15 missions. It is okay but not a big deal so far)

Gta III (finished it lately and enjoyed most of it)

Vice City (played as a kid and loved it)

San Andreas (my favorite so far)

 

Haven't played VCS for long and I played a bit as a kid so I barely remember this game.

[noxomnia]

Best to Worst:

SA

VC

VCS

3

LCS

[.Ryan.]

1) Vice City

2) GTA III

3) San Andreas

4) VCS

5) LCS

[Krymefull]

Most fun

1# San Andreas 

2# Vice City Stories 

3# Vice City 

4# III

5# Liberty City Stories

Least fun

[XNOR]

1. VC
2. SA
3. VCS
4. III
5. LCS

[cant remember]

I'm surprised at how almost everyone rates LCS below III. In my view it improved on III, voiced protag, more modern cars, no gangs locking you out of Portland, better controls, better radio, Fort Staunton has buildings.

 

It's hard for me to put them on a list because I appreciate them all in their own way. (example III is objectively one of the worst both artistically and technically, but I hold it in high regard due to it being the first 3D one and the nostalgia I feel for it), So I'll just put SA on top cause it's by far the "biggest" one with the most content.

And I guess VCS last, because I never liked VC's map (loved the locale, but hated the map layout) so I never cared much to revisit it, and the missions gave me a lot of grief.

[SM-W]

I haven't played any of the Stories games.  Didn't have handhelds, and I never even knew they came out on PS2 - I think I had moved onto the PC by then.

 

I know it's easy to sh*t on GTA3 because it's aged the worst, but even as someone with no nostalgia for any of the 3D games (I didn't play any of them until long after they'd "lost their luster"), I like it in a kind of archaeological way. It's fascinating to play it and see how they were venturing into new territory (GTA up until that point being a very niche series, and kinda part of "the underground" back when that actually meant anything), and to see how Vice City evolved from it. I think it was the first game that had actual licensed music, but you can tell the budget for that was VERY limited. But you can tell that they saw how popular that was, and really pushed that for their next game.  I also quite like the atmosphere - they did a great job of creating this truly sinister feeling world with the visuals.

It's aged about as well as your grandma ... but just like your grandma, she's still got some great memories of the past to share with you.

- - -

Vice City is my absolute favorite. The setting, the time period, probably the best licensed soundtrack of any game or movie. It all just comes together to create this special little experience. It's not a very deep game, but it's got a rich atmosphere, and I truly enjoy the part after you defeat Diaz where you don't have any mission markers, so you have to play the sandbox until you can afford one of the businesses, and then you buy the business and have story missions to complete. If the game is just going from one mission marker to the next until you run into the credits, I never feel comfortable enjoying the sandbox because it's like I'm holding up the progress (but you have to have missions to do or you get sandbox fatigue) - but in that part of the game, the progress was tied to what you did goofing around in the sandbox. And I personally enjoyed that.

- - -

San Andreas is probably the "best game overall", and I do enjoy it a lot ... but it's just not my favorite like Vice City is.  The story is better; the world is much larger with more things to do in it, and having multiple cities you can travel between is nice; the soundtrack doesn't have as many solid hits, but it's far more expansive and diverse; and the game really feels like it's pushing the limits of what could be accomplished with the hardware available at the time. Even if it's not my favorite, there's still plenty to love about it, don't get me wrong,

 

That said, I think San Andreas was a victim of what's called "content creep" and "expectation creep."  After 3 and VC, you couldn't have a game that took place at just one location (Los Santos), so you had to include other cities into the game. And like I said, I *DO* enjoy traveling San Andreas and going to all these different cities and locations ....... but at the same time, adding in those other cities took the focus away from the Los Angeles "bloodbath" era, gang-bangin' and having turf wars against the opposing gang. After Sweet gets arrested, all of that just immediately vanishes, and the game story just kinda starts wandering around and rambling in order to make the most out of the map. Once that happened, I never really felt that invested in the story anymore. My interest only returned once the riots happened, which honestly was a really cool event. But again, that actually brought the game back to L.A. gangbangin' ... and it only took a 12 hour diversion before we got there. Whee.

But even though all three were flawed to various extents, I appreciate that they were all unique experiences from each other, set in different places at different times.
 

Spoiler

One of my biggest disappointments regarding the HD Universe GTA games is that it's always a modern setting. I still say setting GTA6 in modern day VC really is a missed opportunity. You can argue that the 80's have been done to death, but I think it would have been a great opportunity to view the 80's (contrary to how most people do it) in a very "anti-nostalgic way": You go in looking forward to the music, the clothing, the neon, the malls, the cars (back when cars had style and class, and weren't just cheap chunks of plastic sh*t sold with needless touch-screen crap for an exorbitant amount) and straight-forward bank robberies (without 15 layers of rigamarole in order to make it halfway plausible), all of it rendered in the incredible modern detail of the RAGE engine. And while you're getting that, you're also seeing the parts of the 80's nobody likes to mention: The grunginess, the gang wars, the drugs, the economic hardships (just because the economy was "better" in those days, the idea of owning a house wasn't a complete fantasy and there was actually a middle class in America doesn't mean everybody had money and people weren't hungry), the higher crime rates, the corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle and the fears of all-out war looming over everyone's heads. The more things change, the more they stay the same...

 

Plus, and you're welcome to disagree with me on this, but I'll argue that having a game set in modern day Vice City just makes the game "GTA5 2" in a general sense.

Spoiler

Since Miami is really just "The Los Angeles of Florida", and GTA5/Online is updated enough to still be contemporary, you're going to be getting a mostly comparable experience. Same kinds of modern guns, same kinds of modern cars, same kinds of modern people with modern outlooks.

 

And on that note, you're also looking at more-or-less the same map layout in 6 as 5: The highly decadent, highly corrupt, high-crime, ghetto-and-barrio-filled left-leaning hellhole coastal urban metropolis nightmare on the lower edge of the map that's the main attraction, and the rest of the map is the poorer, lower-class, also crime-fraught, trailer-park-filled right-leaning hellhole interior redneck backwoods nightmare that just fills out the rest of the map.  And like San Andreas, trying to fit in more of Florida just detracts attention and care away from the Vice City experience that everyone really wants. And unfortunately, Rockstar is too isolated and removed (and riding too high up on the ol' high horse) to tell a story about the rest of Florida that feels authentic to what the state is actually like, versus the meme version written by people who've never lived in the state. /rant

I dunno. The HD games have a lot more going for them on a technical, graphical and storytelling-depth level, but none of them have ever captured me like the much more simplistic 3D games did.

 

Edited October 16, 2023 by SM-W
Grammar, and finishing a sentence I started but didn't finish

[Moncastler]

1) Vice City Stories, it has all the good things that Vice City had with some good gameplay elements coming from San Andreas and Liberty City Stories. I also think that VCS has the best story among 3D era titles, the soundtrack is amazing and the '80s vibe is perfectly recreated. Shame for the boring side missions and the lack of a PC release

 

2) Vice City, basically for the same reasons of VCS. It is placed in 2nd only because the gameplay is objectively ancient and the story IMO isn't as polished as VCS

 

3) San Andreas, personally I don't really like the story and I find it to be excessively long, the flow is also interrupted multiple times (Ambitious assault: have to swim, desert missions: have to pass flying school, Caligula's casino heist: have to get the key from the croupier, End of the line: have to get 35% of all territories). Gameplay-wise, SA is much better than III and VC. The soundtrack is IMO inferior to VC and VCS, but K-DST and Radio X are 2 solid alternatives for me

 

4) Liberty City Stories, I don't like the story, I don't like 3D-era Liberty City, I don't like the soundtrack but at least the gameplay is mostly on par with SA

 

5) III, same reasons as LCS with the addition of a really really ancient gameplay. The game also becomes a nightmare once you pass all story missions, Saint Mark's is basically a war zone

Edited October 16, 2023 by Moncastler

[zlzgr]

17 hours ago, cant remember said:

I'm surprised at how almost everyone rates LCS below III. In my view it improved on III, voiced protag, more modern cars, no gangs locking you out of Portland, better controls, better radio, Fort Staunton has buildings.

 

It's hard for me to put them on a list because I appreciate them all in their own way. (example III is objectively one of the worst both artistically and technically, but I hold it in high regard due to it being the first 3D one and the nostalgia I feel for it), So I'll just put SA on top cause it's by far the "biggest" one with the most content.

And I guess VCS last, because I never liked VC's map (loved the locale, but hated the map layout) so I never cared much to revisit it, and the missions gave me a lot of grief.

I still think that GTA 3 is better than LCS.

I have only the last mission left in LCS and it is a nice game, but I find GTA 3 way more entertaining. At least the missions.

Most of Portland missions in LCS were meh for me but sine Staunton it got better

I don't know why but I can't like Toni. Claude is not the best protaginist but somehow I like him more than Toni

 

[PhilPerlmutter]

Best to Worst:

GTA San Andreas, GTA Vice City, GTA Vice City Stories, GTA Liberty City Stories, GTA III.

 

That said, the first 2 are not far away from each other, in my opinion the best games that have ever been made.

[The-Ghost]

12 hours ago, Moncastler said:

 

 

2) Vice City, basically for the same reasons of VCS. It is placed in 2nd only because the gameplay is objectively ancient and the story IMO isn't as polished as VCS

I agree with the point but still think it is pretty wild that VCS managed to deliver the better story, in most cases I can think of, sequels usually don't outdo the narrative set in the original stories, but I think VCS managed to do it.

With that said, VC's story isn't all that bad.

[Moncastler]

2 hours ago, MaddenedGhost said:

I agree with the point but still think it is pretty wild that VCS managed to deliver the better story, in most cases I can think of, sequels usually don't outdo the narrative set in the original stories, but I think VCS managed to do it.

With that said, VC's story isn't all that bad.

Oh absolutely, I personally think that it's just below VCS among 3D era titles. I would probably say that even LCS managed to improve the original narrative of III, shame we didn't get a San Andreas Stories

 

VCS story IMO has elements that very clearly come from the simpler 3D era titles but I can also see some aspects of GTA IV and following games. VCS doesn't really have a happy ending, we're left with this bittersweet taste after the last mission which was probably a first for the GTA franchise... And we also already know Vic's fate in VC, so it's safe to assume that all he did in VCS went into waste relatively quickly.

Rockstar went quite in-depth with Vic, IMO he is a very well designed protagonist compared to his predecessors.

[Krymefull]

14 hours ago, MaddenedGhost said:

With that said, VC's story isn't all that bad.

I'll be frank with you brother, Vice City's story and narrative isn't as good as everybody says it is. It's literally toned down Scarface with Italians instead of Cubans.

 

I'm sorry guys, I tried so hard to like the story, but it didn't appeal to me in the slightest. Not to say it's bad per sa, it just isn't as interesting or exciting as I thought it was back then. If I want a classic 80s rags-to-riches Miami story, I'd go watch Scarface.

[SM-W]

11 hours ago, DubiousThiny said:

I'll be frank with you brother, Vice City's story and narrative isn't as good as everybody says it is. It's literally toned down Scarface with Italians instead of Cubans.

 

I'm sorry guys, I tried so hard to like the story, but it didn't appeal to me in the slightest. Not to say it's bad per sa, it just isn't as interesting or exciting as I thought it was back then. If I want a classic 80s rags-to-riches Miami story, I'd go watch Scarface.

I think when people say Vice City's story is "good", I don't believe they're saying it's as "good" as you might be envisioning. (Edit: And for reference, I'm not saying you're wrong for holding the viewpoint you have, I'm just providing a counter-point here:)

I mean, back in that era, a lot of games that were trying to be "serious" were basically "interactive versions of [insert movie]" (Max Payne with John Woo movies, Medal of Honor with Saving Private Ryan) or were heavily influenced by movies. Hell, the overall concept of Half-Life 1 is heavily inspired by Stephen King's book "The Mist". While I can totally get your view of "If I want a classic 80s rags-to-riches Miami story, I'd go watch Scarface," the whole appeal was that, for the first time ever (in 2002), you could PLAY Scarface and Miami Vice in an interactive video game, and get an absolutely killer list of certified 80's classics to go with it!

On that same note, if you think about it, San Andreas is basically early 90's ghetto movies like Boyz in tha Hood, with some bits of Martin Scorsese's Casino thrown in during the Las Venturas parts. (And I'm sure there's more movies the game """pays homage""" to in there, but I'm not really a fan of movies, so I wouldn't know.)  And at least with those movies, it's fully about the gangbangin' experience - whereas San Andreas starts off like that, but after Sweet gets arrested that whole aspect just flies out a window and the game just kinda ... rambles around the map. San Andreas may have a better story, but it loses focus of what it should have been imo. So you could say the same of that game: "It's not bad, but if I wanted a story about being a gangsta back in the 90's, I could watch Colors."

 

I think when it comes to the earlier GTA games, they kind of take the John Carmack approach to narrative: "Story in a video game is like story in a porn movie: it's expected to be there, but it's not important." It's just a framework to hang missions off of. (Which honestly isn't that unique for that era of video games.) So Vice City's story isn't great or boundary pushing, but it's not really supposed to be - and for what it is, I think it's perfectly satisfactory.  But again, that's just me.

Edited October 17, 2023 by SM-W

[Moncastler]

1 hour ago, SM-W said:

I think when it comes to the earlier GTA games, they kind of take the John Carmack approach to narrative: "Story in a video game is like story in a porn movie: it's expected to be there, but it's not important." It's just a framework to hang missions off of. (Which honestly isn't that unique for that era of video games.) So Vice City's story isn't great or boundary pushing, but it's not really supposed to be - and for what it is, I think it's perfectly satisfactory.  But again, that's just me.

I have more or less the same feeling, at least for games up to the early 2000s... Back then games were not designed to tell amazing stories, production costs were waaaaayy lower, hardware was a big limitations and, most importantly, the gaming industry wasn't as big as it is today. I would say that, from the 7th Generation onwards, story telling became more of a priority in gaming development.

Movies still (and probably will) continue to have a better story telling because that's all they need to do, but IMO some games (like RDR2 or TLOU) are quite close to Hollywood productions

 

2 hours ago, SM-W said:

I think when people say Vice City's story is "good", I don't believe they're saying it's as "good" as you might be envisioning. (Edit: And for reference, I'm not saying you're wrong for holding the viewpoint you have, I'm just providing a counter-point here:)

Yeah I agree, I think nostalgia plays a big factor here because, objectively speaking, Vice City and Vice City Stories (and all the other 3D era titles) have an awful story telling for today's standards.

[SM-W]

6 hours ago, Moncastler said:

I have more or less the same feeling, at least for games up to the early 2000s... Back then games were not designed to tell amazing stories, production costs were waaaaayy lower, hardware was a big limitations and, most importantly, the gaming industry wasn't as big as it is today. I would say that, from the 7th Generation onwards, story telling became more of a priority in gaming development.

Movies still (and probably will) continue to have a better story telling because that's all they need to do, but IMO some games (like RDR2 or TLOU) are quite close to Hollywood productions

 

Yeah I agree, I think nostalgia plays a big factor here because, objectively speaking, Vice City and Vice City Stories (and all the other 3D era titles) have an awful story telling for today's standards.

Now see, while I'm definitely not against good stories in games, I also think trying to make games be more like movies kind of takes away from the very reasons people like me play games in the first place.

Spoiler

Of course, part of this may be a bit of bias on my part because, odd as it may sound, I don't really like movies. Oh, there are movies I like, enjoy, and even love ... but generally speaking, I don't like movies, in one part because it's a "static experience" if that makes any sense at all.

For me, the more you make a game like a movie, the more you have to tightly script everything and the more restrictive the game becomes, until eventually you have a game where either a majority of the play time is spent watching cutscenes (I love Max Payne 3's gameplay, but 1/3rd of its runtime is watching cinematics), it's a tightly scripted "action adventure" game with a generic formula, or it's a David Cage game where you're basically moving a character around and then playing Simon Says with your controller.  This is probably why, as I've gotten older, I've really gravitated towards strategy games (preferably turn-based) and social-leaning multiplayer games. In the former, there's always some part of my brain that's activated, trying to figure out what the next move will be, planning into the future, and having to recalculate when the plan changes; and the latter because I'm doing something unscripted with other people and, again, creating my own stories and sharing fun times and laughs with other people.)

 

Examples: (done as a spoiler to condense the post)

Spoiler

My #1 favorite game of all time is Timesplitters 2 (2002). The story is pretty much nonexistent, and is basically a single cutscene at the start of Story Mode to explain why it is you're playing multiple unrelated story mission spread out across time (and space, in some cases). But that doesn't matter, because the actual meat of the game is the Arcade League, The Challenges, unlocking content (characters, levels, weapons, gamemodes) by getting better scores in those missions, and then using Arcade Custom to make all kinds of wacky matches. Like having a CTF match between living snowmen and lawyers / accountants using only thrown bricks as weapons. That's all it needs, because that's all it ever needed to be.

-

One of my most fun times in gaming was playing Sims 3 with my buddy over Skype / screen share. He's a bit of a stiff-lipped, snarky Englishman a quarter-ways on the other side of the planet, but there were times when he made some of the most genuine, happiest laughter I've ever heard as we tried to climb our way out of the sh*ttiest swamp shack you've ever seen. There was one time when our characters were pissed off at each other, and we're literally yelling at each other over the mic because we needed to get back to grinding our painting skills. We're both shouting at each other like he has any control over what his character on my screen is doing, and as if I have anything to do with my Sim yelling at his Sim. The two of us playing that was some of the most fun I think both of us have ever had, and I cherish it infinitely.

Adding Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson in a car chase wouldn't have improved it, nor could it have ever been as entertaining.

-

RDR2 has some incredible scripted set-pieces for sure, phenomenal writing (except for Micah, but I've already ranted about him in the RDR2 bitch and moan thread) and Arthur Morgan is one of the best characters in fiction - and yet my favorite moment of the game was failing a mission because something I did without thinking accidentally led to a chain of events that resulted in certain mission-critical assets getting destroyed, Final Destination style. It's one of the few times a game has made me laugh so hard I couldn't breathe, and it wasn't because a team of writers spent 2 weeks plotting everything, and then a team of 20 people did the mission scripting, and they got the actors for a 2 day shoot on the volume ... it was because I'm a f*cking dumbass who didn't anticipate the ramifications that flaming shotgun rounds and fire propagation would have a minute down the line. It's easily in the top 5 best moments I've ever had playing a game.

So ironically, the more that a game gets closer to being a movie, the more I side with @DubiousThiny's statement: "If I want [x], then I could just watch [y] movie."

 

For me, the best story-focused games are ones like Spec Ops: The Line, a game whose story could only exist in an interactive medium as it's ultimately about the relationship between player and player character, and deconstructs the concept of the player being the guy who, by following the linear path forward that the game forces them to go down, will automatically end up the triumphant hero at the end by doing so. Unlike with most games, where phenomenal gameplay can easily compensate for a lackluster story (Max Payne 3, anyone?), Spec Ops is one of the few instances I can think of where the quality of the story manages to overcome its objectively mediocre gameplay mechanics.

 

 

Anyway, to conclude this long ramble, objectively speaking, I agree with you: All of the 3D era GTA games have mediocre storytelling by today's standards.

And yet, as someone who didn't play the games when they came out, and therefore have no real nostalgia towards them, I also find them much more ... endearing, perhaps?  GTA4 is kind of a slog, a grim story about "American Dream = sham" and "crime =! pay", but one completely at odds with a game where we just want to shiv old ladies and do the "gammy leg" drunk stumble around. And GTA5 is just a big mess of miserable and unlikeable characters, the same "American Dream = Sham" theme running through it, arbitrary plot developments, endless padding, neutered sandbox features, and missions that lead you around by the nose and will fail you for not being at the right spot or, in some cases, not using the specific gun they want you to use. "Well excuuuse me your majesty!" (It's like the game really resents "The Player" as a concept, and I think it'd have been better off being a TV show and not bothering with gameplay at all.)

 

Meanwhile, I enjoy hopping into a car in Vice City and just enjoying the atmosphere of the game, driving around Ocean Bean as Keep Feeling Fascination plays. Or driving through Los Santos in SA, putting on the hip hop station (as someone who's not even into that genre of music), and trying get into the vibe of their world as I do a drive by on some of those Ballas, before driving outside the city to listen to K-Rose, or KDST, or CSR.  Even if the game itself has aged like sh*t, the atmosphere and experience of the game is still there to be enjoyed.

 

They're not the best games, don't have the best story, and the gameplay has definitely aged about as well as a meth addict. But you know what? I kind of prefer them for being nothing more than simple games.

[bahraini_carguy]

1. Vice City Stories

2. San Andreas

3. Vice City

4. Liberty City Stories

5. III

 

On 10/16/2023 at 3:23 AM, SM-W said:

 

 

  Hide contents

One of my biggest disappointments regarding the HD Universe GTA games is that it's always a modern setting. I still say setting GTA6 in modern day VC really is a missed opportunity. You can argue that the 80's have been done to death, but I think it would have been a great opportunity to view the 80's (contrary to how most people do it) in a very "anti-nostalgic way": You go in looking forward to the music, the clothing, the neon, the malls, the cars (back when cars had style and class, and weren't just cheap chunks of plastic sh*t sold with needless touch-screen crap for an exorbitant amount) and straight-forward bank robberies (without 15 layers of rigamarole in order to make it halfway plausible), all of it rendered in the incredible modern detail of the RAGE engine. And while you're getting that, you're also seeing the parts of the 80's nobody likes to mention: The grunginess, the gang wars, the drugs, the economic hardships (just because the economy was "better" in those days, the idea of owning a house wasn't a complete fantasy and there was actually a middle class in America doesn't mean everybody had money and people weren't hungry), the higher crime rates, the corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle and the fears of all-out war looming over everyone's heads. The more things change, the more they stay the same...

 

Ironically, in a way, both Vice City titles kinda attempts at depicting some of these themes but it gets really washed over by "it's the 1980s! it's the 1980s! it's the 1980s!" nostalgia. It reminds me of a meme i saw about LaD/Yakuza Zero and One that refers to both game's plots being fairly gritty but with the former having a heavy dose of "80s glitz".

=====

Overall, as other mentioned, the 3D era were primary focused on providing a fun gameplay with the story being really just a motivation to continue on. Later GTA's may have more complex stories but the gameplay are still the primary attraction and In my opinion, I don't mind that. I'll probably take a game with good to nonexistent storytelling and decent gameplay over a game with a deep plot but unappealing gameplay.

 

I said "unappealing" in this case because the gameplay might actually be fantastic but it's one that I'm not into i.e not made for me. @Moncastler brought up TLOU1 which's a great example as it's the one game that everyone loved....except for me. The gameplay just didn't appeal to me, I don't know how to explain it as to why exactly. Unfortunately, this meant that i basically dropped the game after just 2-4 hours of gameplay. Perhaps i shall give it another chance but who knows.

 

Again, this is not to say i don't want interesting stories but it's just that I'm a simple man who heavily priorities gameplay when it comes to games. Essentially, storytelling is great and all but if the gameplay doesn't attract me then i couldn't be bothered playing through it.

[SM-W]

14 hours ago, bahraini_carguy said:

Ironically, in a way, both Vice City titles kinda attempts at depicting some of these themes but it gets really washed over by "it's the 1980s! it's the 1980s! it's the 1980s!" nostalgia. It reminds me of a meme i saw about LaD/Yakuza Zero and One that refers to both game's plots being fairly gritty but with the former having a heavy dose of "80s glitz".

I never really got that feeling, at least from Vice City.  Vice City was basically put together in about 18 months*, originally starting out as a kind of "Expansion Pack" to GTA3 (so presumably taking place in modern times), before it got turned into a full-on sequel and a period piece. So I don't think Rockstar really had many intentions for it beyond being "GTA3: Miami Edition" and then "GTA3: Miami Edition: 80's Edition" - especially since they weren't really doing deeper stories at that point (It was their first game with a voice protagonist.) 

As for Vice City Stories, as mentioned, I've never played it, so I honestly couldn't say. The one thing I did like about VCS was how it took place at an earlier time period, and how parts of the map changed between the two games. In some respects, it probably changed way more between 1984 and 1986 than it rightfully should have, but I liked the idea.

 

(*VC came out only a year after 3 did, but when I looked it up, it says the development time was 18 months, so I guess they started on it towards the ends of 3's development.)

[bahraini_carguy]

11 hours ago, SM-W said:

I never really got that feeling, at least from Vice City.  Vice City was basically put together in about 18 months*, originally starting out as a kind of "Expansion Pack" to GTA3 (so presumably taking place in modern times), before it got turned into a full-on sequel and a period piece. So I don't think Rockstar really had many intentions for it beyond being "GTA3: Miami Edition" and then "GTA3: Miami Edition: 80's Edition" - especially since they weren't really doing deeper stories at that point (It was their first game with a voice protagonist.) 

As for Vice City Stories, as mentioned, I've never played it, so I honestly couldn't say. The one thing I did like about VCS was how it took place at an earlier time period, and how parts of the map changed between the two games. In some respects, it probably changed way more between 1984 and 1986 than it rightfully should have, but I liked the idea.

 

(*VC came out only a year after 3 did, but when I looked it up, it says the development time was 18 months, so I guess they started on it towards the ends of 3's development.)

Definitely not story wise nor moral talks but i meant it more so in surface level gameplay and parody.

• Gang Violence? I mean it's GTA.

• Drugs? Constant mockery of "lmao everyone in the 80s is a cocaine addict!"

• Economical hardships and grittiness? That's basically much of the west island (VC mainland).

• Corrupt politicians and Soviet panic? Sorta in a mockery sense on the radio but not much.

 

Yes, none of this are depicted in a serious or critical manners because yes, VC's entire plot is basically just a simple, nostalgic fueled, rags to riches ganglord fantasy. That being said, i agree with having GTA 6 be set in another era although not necessarily the 80s.

Edited October 19, 2023 by bahraini_carguy

[Phil Collin]

Its so hard to pick between GTA SA and GTA VC... VC had a better story i like the settings the feeling like sunny Miami 80s good radio. But San Andreas was something new from the previous and there were so many things to do in the game. Can't pick which game i have most nostalgic memories from... But not going to be bias

 

1. GTA Vice City

2. GTA San Andreas

3. GTA VCS

4. GTA 3

5. GTA LCS

Edited October 31, 2023 by Phil Collin

[Lioness30]

1. SA 

2. VC

3. VCS

4. III

5. LCS

[Lioshenka]

Best to worst:

- SA

- III

- VC

- LCS

 

SA and III are very close best for me, but I've rated SA just a bit higher for one reason: it offers a wider variety of landscape and more activities to do after the story is complete.

 

SA has a special place in my heart, it's more than a game, it's part of my life, it has shaped some of my views and perception of the world. It's been a part of my life in more ways that I can put into writing for almost a decade.

 

The reasons I love both SA and III are very much the same. Firstly, it's the atmosphere. III has an unbeatable atmosphere for a computer game, and it hasn't aged a bit now over 20 years later. It's the combination of that beautiful blue tint to everything on PC (grey fog on PS2), ambient sounds of waves or breeze in the treetops, music and map. SA has nailed it by instroducing different weather for each part of the map that makes them feel unique and "right".

 

Maps are very diverse, offering distinct areas of different nature and character. You are not restricted to a single activity, you can choose your activities and tailor your behaviour to suit the area you are in. And of course, they are all beautiful. The sunrise under the Oram bridge or the sunset over the Santa Marina bay; the neons of Red Lights District at night; the purple skies of the desert, the sun glare of Portland, red stormy skies over Back'o'Beyond and cold drizzle over Staunton. None of the Rage era games came close to offer the same level of pure beauty and enjoyment.

 

And this is all complemented by an outstanding selection of radio stations. There's always a station that suits a particular area of the map; all featuring songs representative of the era. And the talk stations are the epitome of a comedy masterpiece.

 

Now, of VC I don't have a very favourable opinion. Sure, it was a great game for its time, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I played it for longer than I have played III, but unlilke other games it has aged badly. As the time passed, it has become more obvious to me how poor the map and character design is. Tommy is an unstable psycho that won't keep his filthy mouth shut; half the map is a waste of space, and the rest of the map looks like it was put together over a week-end. This doesn't take away from the fact that there are nice corners of the map and certain elements that I liked about the game, I won't deny that. Sadly, the version of the game that I played was gifted to me by a friend, so it had Eminem and Shakira on the radio, which, although nice, didn't let me experience the fabled VC radio. I have the proper version on discs, but haven't had the chance or urge to play it through yet.

 

LCS I have only started playing on a smartphone. It's... different, I guess? Can't say it's bad, but its using III's map, and fades in comparison. The atmosphere just isn't the same any more, it's some sort of brown/purple-ish and no longer feels like "home". Tony is not a likeable character - which is ironic, since I'm comparing him to the likes of Claude and CJ, who both have done some despicable things.

Edited January 5 by Lioshenka

[GrudgefromSanAndreas]

only played III, VC and SA.

 

III worst, tie between VC and SA

 

judging by how VCS is apparently much harder than LCS i might not play VCS

so i will just be that guy and say LCS is better than VCS

[cant remember]

It's hard for me to pick because they all have something unique about them. So I guess SA is the one I can say would objectively be the best in terms of scope and sales.

I guess LCS/VCS are the ones I go back to the least because I don't have much of a personal connection to them, played them emulated long after their release

 

III: Most nostalgia, memories drooling on screenshots waiting for it to come out and biggest leap in tech compared to predecessor

VC: Most inviting location, most thematic

SA: biggest scope: largest map, most stuff to do, most cars, most customization, most of everything

LCS: III but with better music, cars and QOL updates

VCS: More VC, what's not to love

[Dr Busta]

San Andreas
Vice city
Vice City Stories
GTA III
GTA LCS

[drcherrybomb]

To be honest, I find it hard to rank them now. My favourite changes depending on the game I'm currently going through. They all are good in their own ways and provide unique vibes.

 

I gotta say, after going through a 100% GTA III playthrough back in the summer of 2024 (man, that was fun), GTA III became more interesting to me than it used to be. 

[TruthRocks]

I have played PC only, so for me:

1) San Andreas - Best GTA ever (from gameplay, to modding, to multiplayer, to sheer content etc)

2) Vice City - Best atmosphere (and i really liked the melee tools' shops)

3) GTA III - That's where things started getting interesting not only for GTA, but for the entire videogames industry

 

Of course, i am not talking about those horrid, putrid "remasters", that not only sullied but even intentionally "killed", the legendary, timeless masterpieces!

Edited February 1 by TruthRocks

[nearmiss1992]

1) SA

2) VCS

3) VC

4) LCS

5) III

[Zeberpal]

1. Vice City:

Atmosphere and "explore city to complete story" second part of the game was extremely enjoyable to me.

 

2. III

The weirdest one in a good way. Unfriendly, also in a good way. Simple mechanics, which is a plus here.

 

3. San Andreas

Most complex. Loved the countryside and desert parts, it was refreshing after previous city-based games. Large map and 90s vibe.

 

4. Liberty City Stories

Loved Ma's questline and hitmen. Overall had a lot of fun playing it on PSP; it was mind-blowing back then.

 

5. Vice City Stories

Story and dialogues are laughable. Vic claims to be a law-abiding citizen, yet he may kills hundreds of innocent people for no particular reason. Hell, Vic can go loose while still being in the army and gets kicked out of it for a much lesser crime. Things like these resonate quite a lot during the story. Lance's behavior is irritating to say the least. Louise is just meh. Overall feels like a retcon to Vice city.

BUT, best music radio, funniest talk radio. Gameplay-wise it's pretty fun.

Edited February 11 by Zeberpal

[BoulderFaceplant]

5: III

4: LCS

3: VC

2: VCS

1: SA

 

I don’t think any of these games are terribly tolerable these days without save states or checkpoints. Too much random sh*t can happen during missions. An unlucky vehicle spawn, something loads in weirdly and collides with your car, that sort of thing. So that’s worth pointing out, as much as I love the top 3 of these. 
 

Liberty City Stories sits at the bottom with III thanks to the abysmal street layout of the third island- absolute dogsh*t. III is overly simplistic in its story compared to the others, and honestly VC (while a huge step up) retains some of that vibe of “here’s a task, go do it” rinse and repeat dullness. VCS is preferable thanks to smart changes made to the West Island, better controls and handling, a more interesting story, and a better atmosphere. It’s honestly not a good look that the PS2 versions of the Stories games retain the low-poly cars that were necessary on PSP, but man do the characters and lighting effects look better than III and VC, in my opinion anyway. 
 

San Andreas stands above them all and is the only one that feels epic. VCS and LCS oddly lost some of its gameplay features, most notably climbing over ledges. I do wish they would’ve found a way to keep the vehicle shading detail that III and VC cars had. At least for the Xbox version? I dunno. But CJ’s journey feels so much more nuanced, more earned.