|
Cojawfee posted:There were way too many things in SA too. If you want more stuff to do because you have no life, you can buy it as DLC. Or they could put it in the game, not make people who want to play it pay extra for it, and then people like you can just ignore it because none of it is required. Just like they have been doing! Yay!
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 06:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
I'm just saying that if you have enough time to go on gay forklift dates with 150 horseshoes, you can probably afford to pay for it. I just want my imaginary choices and linear plots. VVV This guy knows what's up.  
Cojawfee fucked around with this message at 06:42 on Apr 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 06:38
|
|
|
I hope in GTA V you can only drive in one direction. There is too many directions in the past GTAs, and maybe if other people want to go in other directions can buy it as DLC because they have no life 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:I'm just saying that if you have enough time to go on gay forklift dates with 150 horseshoes, you can probably afford to pay for it. I just want my imaginary choices and linear plots. And what is other people going on "gay forklift dates" doing to stop you from only doing the story missions? What about these being a completely optional thing in the game is making you have to stop going through the story and do them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 06:41
|
|
|
You just know people would pay for a 'Comedy Club DLC'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 06:42
|
|
|
MoaM posted:You just know people would pay for a 'Comedy Club DLC'. Was there even any downloadable stuff for GTAIV that wasn't either of the expansions?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 07:03
|
|
|
webmeister posted:Was there even any downloadable stuff for GTAIV that wasn't either of the expansions? Nope, all the other incidental stuff, like extra comedy club sections, new vehicles, new multiplayer modes, etc. were included with them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 07:26
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:Nope, all the other incidental stuff, like extra comedy club sections, new vehicles, new multiplayer modes, etc. were included with them. TLAD and TBOGT are probably the best DLC released in this generation. They both had more content for twenty bucks than a lot of full-scale games do at sixty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 14:01
|
|
|
AngryCaterpillar posted:Los Santos wont feel the same if there isnt a crazy selection of vehicles to mess around in. Off the top of my head SA had The tractors were the best. They had a hitch that you could hitch to any other vehicle and tow it around. You could hitch a train of tractors together and whip that poo poo all over the city. Toot toot!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 14:13
|
|
|
Several people were whooshed somehow
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 14:35
|
|
|
I realise there probably won't be jet packs, but I do hope they bring back bicycles. Even if they make them not usable by the player Saints Row style. It's weird to have a city where nobody is on a bike. Well the trailer at least showed a crop duster, a fighter jet and a jetski so we do know there will be a better vehicle selection than GTAIV. Also I want more ways to earn money. It was stupid that in GTAIV you had to practically finish the game before you got somewhere to sell stolen cars. It's the loving title of the game! And more ways to spend money- I want a lot more shops.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 16:49
|
|
|
Erwin posted:The tractors were the best. They had a hitch that you could hitch to any other vehicle and tow it around. You could hitch a train of tractors together and whip that poo poo all over the city. Toot toot! I did this with tow trucks. That glitch where it'd throw the train of whatever you had if you turned sharply was amazing and I spent way too much time hitching up like 15 tow trucks and a semi at the end of it and then flinging it all over the horizon. Why are games so perfect now, gimme back my weird physics gently caress-ups dammit   marktheando posted:Also I want more ways to earn money. It was stupid that in GTAIV you had to practically finish the game before you got somewhere to sell stolen cars. It's the loving title of the game! And more ways to spend money- I want a lot more shops. Really if they just gave us everything from San Andreas that'd be enough. I really liked the RPG elements and all the properties you could buy. Hopefully they bring them back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 16:58
|
|
|
I'm gonna get GTA5 no matter what but I hope it's as silly as San Andreas was. GTA4 was too serious and dull.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
Overbite posted:I'm gonna get GTA5 no matter what but I hope it's as silly as San Andreas was. GTA4 was too serious and dull. I wonder what the percentage split is between people who think it should be more silly, or more like GTA 4... In reality, if you want a silly GTA, why don't you just play saints row and let there be an alternative for people who want a more serious GTA?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 19:19
|
|
|
I'll take serious any day over lighthearted if it's going to be anything similar to Ballad of Gay Tony.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
I need to give Saint's Row (2) a better try, and try out 3 at some point, but I'm in a similar boat where San Andreas somehow just hit the mark perfectly. The over-the-top paranoid secret agent missions just killed me, specifically. Something about Saint's Row 2 just rubs me the wrong way. I don't MIND GTA IV, but it is a bit dull. I don't find it nearly as entertaining. I'm definitely looking forward to getting to the DLCs though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
I dont understand why everyone wants GTA to be more like Saint's Row in the crazy department. They should stay in their own lane to offer more variety. I liked the seriousness of IV and if you wanted wacky could go play Saint's Row
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
I don't want wacky, I want fun. There's a difference.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
Who said fun has to be wacky? GTA IV was dull as poo poo. Literally nothing fun about the game other than chase people around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 20:50
|
|
|
Shindragon posted:Who said fun has to be wacky? GTA IV was dull as poo poo. Literally nothing fun about the game other than chase people around. Im still enjoying the game 4 years after it came out and I havent touched the SP since I first bought the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:I need to give Saint's Row (2) a better try, and try out 3 at some point, but I'm in a similar boat where San Andreas somehow just hit the mark perfectly. The over-the-top paranoid secret agent missions just killed me, specifically. Something about Saint's Row 2 just rubs me the wrong way. Skip Saints Row 3, it's not as good as 2. The city in Saints Row 3 is just really dull to explore and it has tons of bullshit DLC. They forgot the most important thing about GTA games- the city is the real main character. Also they removed tons of customisation options. But yeah Saints Row 2 is awesome, a lot of fun. It fills the void left by all the silly stuff that was in San Andreas and not in GTAIV. the_american_dream posted:I dont understand why everyone wants GTA to be more like Saint's Row in the crazy department. They should stay in their own lane to offer more variety. I liked the seriousness of IV and if you wanted wacky could go play Saint's Row I liked GTAIV as well, but GTA has always been wacky and crazy, IV was quite a departure in terms of tone. It's not surprising some people want to return to the old days of jetpacks and mowing down Hare Krishnas and other silly things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
Like sorry, I will admit I get a little annoyed when people write off SR as some wacky game. I enjoyed GTA IV's DLC more, that felt more like how GTA was. Like to me it's GTA was the definition of sandbox, a sandbox that lets you do what you want. I didn't find anything to do in GTA IV. Just felt barren. You can point out the city was big. Yeah it was, so what, nothing to do there. It doesn't have to be SA levels of wacky. Add more side missions, or something. Like yeah you don't have to add those silly side missions with delivering pizzas and all but at least spruce it up. Maybe add some missions where you deliver drugs and things go wrong and you have to take out everyone who is trying to kill you, add more stuff that made GTA fun. The set pieces were okay but just because it's serious doesn't mean it can't be fun. Not make it a girlfriend/bowling/dance simulator. Rockstar is very capable of making GTA great and the DLC shows they still have it. IV was a disappointment, but I putting hopes into the fifth one if the DLC and RDR is any indication that they are still good at making games. Shindragon fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Apr 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Fun is subjective and if having an "awesome button" having the ability to customize women with deep male British accents among other things, having a weapon where you catapult people/shoot poo poo or a fart in a jar (I don't know if that made it in the final version or not) doesn't fall under your definition of wacky then idk. It isnt a write off of the game, its still fun but thats what it is. Wacky GTAmarktheando posted:
Thats fine I understand that as well, I just think the departure happened for a reason. Maybe a new direction to take the series and I just dont understand why that's just a horrible thing to some people the_american_dream fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Apr 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
Because it causes conflict with the character. I did liked how they were tackling Niko Belic, it felt like a fresh take. Yet like 1/3 of the way they gave up on him and just decided to say gently caress it. it also doesn't help that the character conflicts with the character's interaction. Kinda takes you out of the experience. Also when they went the serious route, they basically took everything away. No Niko Belic is poor, he can't buy houses, etc. Wait what about that 250k bank rob? NO his cousin gambled it all the way. Do you see how that can piss off players? That threw me out of the game. It felt like one hand behind your back. All this money and you can't do anything with it. Like I really love how life like Liberty City was, that was awesome, but there wasn't nothing to do. I mean yeah you can say wreck poo poo, but well to me I fall asleep. There is only so much you can do with kill peds or running people over before it gets old. That's my beef with GTAIV, it just basically felt like the first games that came out for the 360/ps3 where features were stripped out. And I know rockstar is far better than the certain companies like EA (hell did you know the first madden game on 360 was really bad? Features were stripped out it was bare bones)
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
Liberty City was just so lifeless. The whole city was just boring layered on top of more boring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:37
|
|
|
Shindragon posted:Who said fun has to be wacky? GTA IV was dull as poo poo. Literally nothing fun about the game other than chase people around. That is what I was saying. I'm on your side here, IV was a step backwards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:42
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:That is what I was saying. I'm on your side here, IV was a step backwards. Oh haha well I was actually responding to american dream. Sorry for the confusion. I kinda see how because I literally followed up fun doesn't have to mean wacky. Like I get what you mean dream with the variety. But I fell GTA can be much more. IV felt like it didn't have all the potential for a next gen GTA game. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I was blown away when GTA 3 game out. The side games VC and SA were great. So when the fourth game was coming out I was really excited to see how much it would evolve, so that would explain my disappointment with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
Shindragon posted:Because it causes conflict with the character. I did liked how they were tackling Niko Belic, it felt like a fresh take. Yet like 1/3 of the way they gave up on him and just decided to say gently caress it. it also doesn't help that the character conflicts with the character's interaction. Kinda takes you out of the experience. Also when they went the serious route, they basically took everything away. No Niko Belic is poor, he can't buy houses, etc. Wait what about that 250k bank rob? NO his cousin gambled it all the way. Do you see how that can piss off players? That threw me out of the game. It felt like one hand behind your back. All this money and you can't do anything with it. I loved GTAIV but one thing like this that makes absolutely zero sense is not letting you do taxi missions except for in a brief part of the game near the start. Your cousin owns a taxi company! Not that taxi missions were something I ever did a lot, but they were sometimes good for a change of pace. I remember at the time being blown away by GTA3 basically including the entire game of Crazy Taxi as an optional minigame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:50
|
|
|
Oh good, Saints Row vs. GTA argument #289624 is starting. I thought #289623 did leave a lot to be desired.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:53
|
|
|
Knightmare posted:Oh good, Saints Row vs. GTA argument #289624 is starting. I thought #289623 did leave a lot to be desired.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:56
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I loved GTAIV but one thing like this that makes absolutely zero sense is not letting you do taxi missions except for in a brief part of the game near the start. Your cousin owns a taxi company! You got five craaaaazy minutes!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 21:56
|
|
|
If people think we are steering a GTA v.s. SR convo. I'm not. I love both series, they provided their ways of entertainment. GTA doesn't need dildo swords, or jet helicopters at all. Just make the game fun. It doesn't need to necessarily get rid of it's theme, hell even something serious like RDR was fun, that's all I want from GTA. Make it fun, not a boring life simulator which it felt like it was doing. Lke actually make the character engage in improving the lifestyle or something. Make them organize their own little crime, run some crime syndicates, just something really cool and fun. Not stare at a bunch of money and go bowling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
Eh actually now that I think about it, I agree with you on that point. I liked the NY/Life simulator but it would've been nice to have something to spend the money on. Property or something
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 22:49
|
|
|
the_american_dream posted:Eh actually now that I think about it, I agree with you on that point. I liked the NY/Life simulator but it would've been nice to have something to spend the money on. Property or something This was one of my bigger gripes with GTAIV; shitloads of cash with nothing to spend it on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 23:05
|
|
|
Yeah, that and going on a rampage in GTA3 through SA was fun but having the cops after you in 4 is a chore. I'm not asking for it to be like Saints Row but GTA4 felt like a big step back after San Andreas. That said I'm still gonna buy it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 00:07
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Also I want more ways to earn money. It was stupid that in GTAIV you had to practically finish the game before you got somewhere to sell stolen cars. It's the loving title of the game! And more ways to spend money- I want a lot more shops. I don't want something as ridiculously extensive as Saints Row III's upgrade system, but the ability to spend money on things that would actually give you tangible gameplay benefits would be cool, especially as an alternative to the more boring and grind-y side of GTA's gameplay. Like as an alternative to going on a bunch of dates to romance a nurse for a health benefit you could buy up a clinic, or instead of spending an hours grinding taxi cab missions to get nitrous on taxis you could just buy the drat company and make them install nitrous on everything. That way people who like the (man)dates and grinding on side activities can still do them, and people who don't can still reap the rewards by earning money doing things that they do like. the_american_dream posted:I dont understand why everyone wants GTA to be more like Saint's Row in the crazy department. They should stay in their own lane to offer more variety. I liked the seriousness of IV and if you wanted wacky could go play Saint's Row It's not mutually exclusive. Every GTA except IV has been goofy and light-hearted without being as pants-on-head-crazy as Saint's Row. In fact that very willingness to put fun and gameplay over seriousness has a lot to do with why last-gen's GTA knockoffs never really eclipsed GTA despite often having gameplay or graphics that were a huge improvement on GTA; The Godfather might have better graphics, and addictive racketeering metagame, and a robust melee system but you can't jump your car off of a sweet ramp and then use a boat to distribute flyers for a porn studio before driving an ice cream truck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
After Red Dead Redemption I have my hopes up for V. Especially after realizing how long they have had to make a game, and not have to worry too much about a game engine gives me confidence we will get a nice balance between SA and IV. As for the SR vs GTA argument, just be glad we have two sides of the same coin as opposed to one game coming off as a knock off of the other.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
For me, at least, the "go play SR if you want wacky" argument is annoying because although I enjoyed Saints Row 2 and 3 they're not GTA. They're immensely fun but still rough around the edges and lack the polish of the GTA series. I want a fun game with the satisfying driving physics and damage modeling of GTAIV, and more of the kind of weaponry we saw in TBoGT.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 01:02
|
|
|
I'm fine if Rockstar sticks to their own niche. Games like The Warriors, Max Payne 2, Red Dead Redemption and even TLAD - GTAIV's ultra serious expansion pack - are all great examples of Rockstar doing good work at their utmost serious. If anything, hold on to the "fun" and "humor" of past GTA games held GTAIV back. Here you had an ultra serious world where you walked into an internet cafe called Tw@t. Haha, so funny. So unique. Haha, and then use that to kill a stereotypically gay guy. I'm loving dying here guys. Really, I am. And then they expect me to take their crappy cartoon story and world seriously? marktheando posted:Skip Saints Row 3, it's not as good as 2. Yeah, don't listen to him. Play all three. Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 06:20 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
Unfortunately I'll probably never play Saint's Row 1, even though it has one of my all-time favourite bands on the soundtrack (Ned's Atomic Dustbin) because I'll never have a 360. I have 2 on PC, and it's not TOO hard to get running decently, though they certainly made it a challenge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 06:34
|
|