it has been nearly ten years since GTAV

[Himu]

Holy fuck I'm dying for some car jacking action. Gtav was first announced like ten years ago.

Fuck GTA online. GTA is now a once every ten years franchise now and that's utter bullshit.

Hell, there won't even be a new gta this gen. Gtav for next gen systems were ports of an already established game.

[MMaRsu]

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

[toku]

Quality >

[Great Rumbler]

It's been 80 years...

[paprikastaude]

I only want 2D GTA and that's never happening again even in 10 years.

[Lonewulfeus]

It’s been 6 and a half years

[Himu]

It’s been 6 and a half years

I FEELS LIKE TEN

I NEED ME SOME CAR JACKIN

[Lonewulfeus]

I’m just playing through the story for the first time and I’m having a good time.  I usually play it for a bit, get distracted by shit and then don’t play enough to get used to the janky ass controls.  But this time I’m going to finish it.

[MMaRsu]

I’m just playing through the story for the first time and I’m having a good time.  I usually play it for a bit, get distracted by shit and then don’t play enough to get used to the janky ass controls.  But this time I’m going to finish it.

make sure to put the control scheme to : STANDARD FPS

[porkbun]

Also your characters abilities will get better as you go further in the story, so the driving and shooting get tighter.

[Himu]

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

fuck gta online. piece of shit resulted in no single player dlc,

[MMaRsu]

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

fuck gta online. piece of shit resulted in no single player dlc,

 

no

[Lonewulfeus]

I’m just playing through the story for the first time and I’m having a good time.  I usually play it for a bit, get distracted by shit and then don’t play enough to get used to the janky ass controls.  But this time I’m going to finish it.

make sure to put the control scheme to : STANDARD FPS

I’ll have to check that out, thanks!

[Don Rumata]

It’s been 6 and a half years

To be fair, we ain't getting GTA 6 before 2023.

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

fuck gta online. piece of shit resulted in no single player dlc,

 

no

Rockstar said so themselves.

[Mr Gilhaney]

I always end up getting excited for a new GTA, but really I am absolutely fine with the wait times between them. Only so much of the terrible houser satire, and standard gta missions you can take. It's fun and all, for the first 30 hours or so, but I never even complete the anymore anyway. Last one I did was Vice City, and I am not trying to say that is a better game than GTAV or even San Andreas, but it just felt less bloated and I like that.

[porkbun]

I think the "side games" Episodes from Liberty City and the Liberty City/Vice City Stories games are a good length. 

[MMaRsu]

It’s been 6 and a half years

To be fair, we ain't getting GTA 6 before 2023.

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

fuck gta online. piece of shit resulted in no single player dlc,

 

no

Rockstar said so themselves.

nah man
“No, it was not really a conscious decision, it’s just what happened,” Sarwar told GI. “With GTA 5, the single-player game was absolutely massive and very, very complete. It was three games in one. The next-gen versions took a year of everyone’s time to get right, then the online component had a lot of potential but to come close to realizing that potential, also sucked up a lot of resources. And then there are other games – in particular Red Dead Redemption 2. The combination of these three factors means for this game, we did not feel single-player expansions were either possible or necessary.”

[thisismyusername]

It’s been 6 and a half years

Even then: No DLC to actually fix the barren north or add SAn Fran or Las Vegas to the game like the older San Andreas.

[Don Rumata]

It’s been 6 and a half years

To be fair, we ain't getting GTA 6 before 2023.

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

fuck gta online. piece of shit resulted in no single player dlc,

 

no

Rockstar said so themselves.

nah man
“No, it was not really a conscious decision, it’s just what happened,” Sarwar told GI. “With GTA 5, the single-player game was absolutely massive and very, very complete. It was three games in one. The next-gen versions took a year of everyone’s time to get right, then the online component had a lot of potential but to come close to realizing that potential, also sucked up a lot of resources. And then there are other games – in particular Red Dead Redemption 2. The combination of these three factors means for this game, we did not feel single-player expansions were either possible or necessary.”

What i'm referring to is an interview where they mention the success of GTAO catching them off guard, and them basically having to rethink their general strategy.
I'll post it if i can find it, though tbh, i'm not sure how to search through 6 years of random interviews.
I believe it was around the time the remaster came out.
The actor playing Franklin and Michael also were called in for some shoots, IIRC, but the plans were obviously scrapped, and in one of the Newswire updates, they outright mentioned that more single player content was coming (this i remember reading and discussing on GAF at the time, even).

That said, GTA Online probably wasn't the only factor, and i'm sure working on RDR2, and in general, the lower profitability of a beefy single player component, compared to the amount of work needed, were also elements to consider for them.

I think the three GTAV characters were shitty, so i don't miss it too much, but the map did have a lot of unexplored potential, especially the country areas.

[Himu]

I MISS GTA

I am fucking dying for a new GTA game

[chronovore]

Yeah, so?

Id rather have a next gen GTA 6 then a current gen GTA.

Gta Online is pretty fun to mess around in imo

I have no beef with them taking a long time to make it. Especially seeing Dan Houser leave.. now thats scary.

fuck gta online. piece of shit resulted in no single player dlc,

If you mean no "Lost and the Damned" or "The Ballad of Gay Tony," then you're correct.
If you instead mean there's nothing story-driven that was also downloadable, you're not.
There have been plenty of story-adjacent DLC items like Online Heists, and a separate special-ops/James Bond bunker-driven action movie with the Doomsday Heist, many of which have sequential Jobs given by characters from the main game.
But, yeah, I would have loved a GTA V San Andreas Stories like we had for Vice City and Liberty City.

I think the "side games" Episodes from Liberty City and the Liberty City/Vice City Stories games are a good length.

[benjipwns]

It's been longer since a Saints Row game.

[benjipwns]

 

[Raist]

Why would they bother making a new one? GTAV still sells like it released a couple months ago.

[pilonv1]

It's been longer since a Saints Row game.

Agents of Mayhem came out in like 2017

ltf

Someone port SR2 to Switch pls

[MMaRsu]

It's been longer since a Saints Row game.

Agents of Mayhem came out in like 2017

ltf

Someone port SR2 to Switch pls

Better not, shit is garbo

[bork]

It's been longer since a Saints Row game.

Agents of Mayhem came out in like 2017

ltf

Someone port SR2 to Switch pls

Better not, shit is garbo

GTFO

[MMaRsu]

It's been longer since a Saints Row game.

Agents of Mayhem came out in like 2017

ltf

Someone port SR2 to Switch pls

Better not, shit is garbo

GTFO

My favorite Saints Row game, but come on, have you played it recently? Not only does it run like shit on all platforms, I dont think you'd be able to deal with this kind of graphics

[porkbun]

Graphics < Gameplay every time.

SR2 was the best open world game of the PS3/XB360 generation.  The only major drawback for me is the soundtrack.  Fuck Paramore.

Looking back on GTAV, I think I liked GTA4 more. Both single player and especially multiplayer. I shit all over GTA4 shortly after release but I have a huge desire to replay it and I definitely feel that I got more enjoyment out of it than GTA5.

Niko is by far the best protagonist in any GTA game.  If you're gonna replay it, definitely do the Episodes also.

[MMaRsu]

Eh Id probably still take GTA V over it, but yeah SR2 was pretty great when it came out. Although it still missing some cool features from Saints Row 1, customization over your character wise. 

Like in SR1 you could have some clothing options in layering and how to wear your jeans etc, that were missing from 2. Also I thought the multiplayer in 1 was really good fun, especially the mode Blinged Out Ride. That was missed sadly. Also the soundtrack for the first game was pretty good, having DOOM on it and Madvillain.

I played the demo of the first game to death haha, going out of bounds to discover more of the map.

Recently I wanted to replay IV and the episodes, but for some reason it runs like crap on my system. FPS is high but it's stuttering like crazy, really a bummer.

[chronovore]

AND YET SHE PERSISTED.

Looking back on GTAV, I think I liked GTA4 more. Both single player and especially multiplayer. I shit all over GTA4 shortly after release but I have a huge desire to replay it and I definitely feel that I got more enjoyment out of it than GTA5.

I guess it's down to personal preference, but for me:

• dropping all the R3 Mission types from the previous titles was unforgivable.
• ditching the antics and lampooning of American culture (esp. Ammunation!) in favor of Scorsese-ing it up was lame.
• the tumescent ragdolling of Euphoria and NaturalMotion made the controls unbearable.

[thisismyusername]

Euphoria was fine. But yeah, the controls being shit didn't help. I'm fine with ragdolls improving and it was cool. But the cars driving like boats sucked ass.

[Chooky]

don't forget the overly serious story that rambled on and on and went nowhere. or how about how they took out almost everything you could spend money on so there was fuck all customization (except for a bunch of tracksuits lol). oh and no checkpoints that was a lot if fun on later missions huh

[Himu]

Gtaiv is ass and I hate that I liked that porkbun post that said Niko "I'll kill this guy for 50 dollars but why can't I stop keeling people?!" Bellic is the best GTA protag because he gave props to SR2.

In fact the second half of the post is so triggering that I think I'll just go and unlike it

Also mmarsu proves that there's something in the water in the Netherlands. Truly a wounded people that have had brain damage over time. Every single post made in this thread is wrong and he should feel bad. Jesus Christ on crackers Dutch posters are useless.

[nachobro]

niko isn't even the best character in his game

[Himu]

Tommy Vercetti is the best but my favorite is still Claude Speed. I like the strong, silent, shut the fuck up and do the job type. A tough head nod is all you need.

[nachobro]

I liked Tommy a lot but I'm also the only person I know that likes both Franklin and Michael.

IMO in GTA games the side characters always stand out more than the protagonists.

[Himu]

Michael is a fantastic character. I think GTAV story would be better if it was just about him. The old, retired bank robber suffering from a midlife crisis that gets back into the game had so much potential. Then they kind of blew it.

[nachobro]

I like the idea of Franklin being an aspiring criminal and Michael trying to tell him it's not what it's cracked up to be but they didn't really dig into that as much as I would have wanted.

[Himu]

Same. Franklin kind just drops off after a while

[Svejk]

Haven't cared for a GTA since Vice City..  The fun torch was easily passed to the Row.

[Chooky]

Row was great but the low budget killed it. fun writing and creative missions still weren't enough to offset the way they used the same dull map for three games in a row.

[mormapope]

The ultimate irony is, Red Dead Redemption 2 is more of a sequel to GTA IV for than GTA V was. Most of the criticism and praise of IV has been applied to RDR2.

Clunky or slow, unresponsive controls (which I do love, I don't want every single game to feel the same).

Story or narrative driven above all else, everything revolving around the story's themes is reflected in gameplay.

Excellent world building, unbelievable sense of time and place.

An emphasis on more realistic approached to more gamey things.

The main difference is, people were able to empathize and bond with Arthur, love him as a character and person. Niko was a very conflicted, broken, flawed person. Not much about him is lovable.

I do genuinely believe most people don't like Niko, over him being a terribly written character. The emphasis of people saying "he says he wants to change, BUT HE KILLS LIKE A THOUSAND PEOPLE! ", that is the ENTIRE fucking point of his character. He is FLAWED and a HYPOCRITE, two human behaviors and traits.

If you watch all the cutscenes, Niko is painted as flawed, and the emptiness of living in Liberty City exasperated that. You're offered a choice of killing a junkie or corrupt cop, both brother's to one of your friends. The main love interest after Michelle is the alcoholic sister of that same friend.

Roman is a loser, Brucie is a loser, Little Jacob is perpetually stoned, Packie is a broken and degenerate criminal.

The entire game is a depressing romp with absolutely no hope,  with likable but fleshed out characters, depicting one of the biggest and most popular cities during W Bush era America.

Most of the criticism leveled at GTA IV about gameplay? I understand that, and on many levels, it's not addictive or fleshed out like PS2 GTAs. But everything about GTAIV is meant to be taken in as a whole. It is not supposed to be a larger than life, power fantasy experience. It's purpose is to be a depressing and cynical journey in a lively and believable world.

GTA V in so many ways felt like a game born from fans bitching and whining about GTA IV. I love GTA V as well, but it feels entirely reactive as a developed game, rather than having a strong creative vision from the start.

I've been a GTA and Rockstar fan since GTA III, I play these fucking games like they're crack. The common criticism thrown at GTAIV is generally lacking in any critical or deep understanding of the game.

[Himu]

Row was great but the low budget killed it. fun writing and creative missions still weren't enough to offset the way they used the same dull map for three games in a row.

SR1 and 2 map are entirely different. 3 was a different city entirely. 2's map is full of easter eggs and things to explore. Baffling opinion.

[Himu]

I do genuinely believe most people don't like Niko, over him being a terribly written character. The emphasis of people saying "he says he wants to change, BUT HE KILLS LIKE A THOUSAND PEOPLE! ", that is the ENTIRE fucking point of his character. He is FLAWED and a HYPOCRITE, two human behaviors and traits.

Or they fucked up on the writing of the character. I know it's the point. Doesn't make the execution good.

Also kind of weird to say GTAV lacks creative force when R* wanted gamers to sit and deal with Michael's degrading family storyline. They were up their asses with GTAIV. "Niko wouldn't drive a ambulance so we've decided to not have R3 ambulance missions". SMH.

[mormapope]

I do genuinely believe most people don't like Niko, over him being a terribly written character. The emphasis of people saying "he says he wants to change, BUT HE KILLS LIKE A THOUSAND PEOPLE! ", that is the ENTIRE fucking point of his character. He is FLAWED and a HYPOCRITE, two human behaviors and traits.

Or they fucked up on the writing of the character. I know it's the point. Doesn't make the execution good.

The goal was to have a very flawed character that muddles in the idea of redemption and starting anew, but the environment he attempts to do that in, only makes him more empty and makes him dig deeper into his own grave, taking those important people around him, with him.

How did they fail? How did the writers fuck up?

This is why conversations about GTA IV don't work, people that genuinely try to understand the intent of the game waste energy with people that want movie parody and satire/slapstick based storytelling, with build your own criminal empire gameplay. It's a huge split in the audience and GTAIV, RDR1, and RDR2 demonstrate that.

[nachobro]

gta4 was boring as shit in every way possible

[Chooky]

Row was great but the low budget killed it. fun writing and creative missions still weren't enough to offset the way they used the same dull map for three games in a row.

SR1 and 2 map are entirely different. 3 was a different city entirely. 2's map is full of easter eggs and things to explore. Baffling opinion.

3 - 4 - Gat Out of Hell

three games in a row, same map

[mormapope]

gta4 was boring as shit in every way possible

Give me more boring shit, less Scarface power fantasies plsssssss

[nachobro]

i don't mind if they do it right. gta4 was not done right. rdr2 was at its core a pretty boring story but it was told well and the game was fun.

[Himu]

I do genuinely believe most people don't like Niko, over him being a terribly written character. The emphasis of people saying "he says he wants to change, BUT HE KILLS LIKE A THOUSAND PEOPLE! ", that is the ENTIRE fucking point of his character. He is FLAWED and a HYPOCRITE, two human behaviors and traits.

Or they fucked up on the writing of the character. I know it's the point. Doesn't make the execution good.

The goal was to have a very flawed character that muddles in the idea of redemption and starting anew, but the environment he attempts to do that in, only makes him more empty and makes him dig deeper into his own grave, taking those important people around him, with him.

How did they fail? How did the writers fuck up?

This is why conversations about GTA IV don't work, people that genuinely try to understand the intent of the game waste energy with people that want movie parody and satire/slapstick based storytelling, with build your own criminal empire gameplay. It's a huge split in the audience and GTAIV, RDR1, and RDR2 demonstrate that.

RDR1 is full of boring shit like coralling horses. I love boring. Michael's family story is boring. I dig boring. But Niko Bellic is not a good character. In order for a character like that to work you have to harp on his flaws. Like in Taxi Driver, Scorsese clearly shows his spiraling mental state.



In Apocalypse Now you get the intro that shows the main character clearly suffering from PTSD.



In order for a character like Niko to work you have to get more than what they provided. He has to go into his flaws and acknowledge them. The game does a poor job of establishing Niko's flaws. But here's the thing. In a story like this the trick is not only to show the characters flaws but also create empathy surrounding those blemishes. Take the recent Joker film. We know he's mentally ill and has fucked up actions/thoughts. But the movie smartly creates an empathetic case surrounding them to help further contextualize them.

Show me a scene in GTAIV where the game does this for Niko? The game is limited by the fact that the only cutscenes that show up are during and after missions. You don't see how Niko is personally dealing with his hypocrisy or how he even justifies it.

It's just bad.

Good idea, poor execution.

Row was great but the low budget killed it. fun writing and creative missions still weren't enough to offset the way they used the same dull map for three games in a row.

SR1 and 2 map are entirely different. 3 was a different city entirely. 2's map is full of easter eggs and things to explore. Baffling opinion.

3 - 4 - Gat Out of Hell

three games in a row, same map

Oh sorry. I forgot SR4 and Gat Out of Hell exist. For me Saints Row ends with 3.

[Chooky]

4's story could been something, but instead it ending up being rambling nonsense like most other rockstar games. tons of cutscenes and endless dialog but a story that goes nowhere. honestly i felt like 5's story, flawed as it was, was a huge step up from previous games.

[Himu]

4's story could been something, but instead it ending up being rambling nonsense like most other rockstar games. tons of cutscenes and endless dialog but a story that goes nowhere. honestly i felt like 5's story, flawed as it was, was a huge step up from previous games.

It really was.

[porkbun]

Gtaiv is ass and I hate that I liked that porkbun post that said Niko "I'll kill this guy for 50 dollars but why can't I stop keeling people?!" Bellic is the best GTA protag because he gave props to SR2.

In fact the second half of the post is so triggering that I think I'll just go and unlike it

Also mmarsu proves that there's something in the water in the Netherlands. Truly a wounded people that have had brain damage over time. Every single post made in this thread is wrong and he should feel bad. Jesus Christ on crackers Dutch posters are useless.

 

[HardcoreRetro]

Dutch posters are useless.

 :'(

[mormapope]

I do genuinely believe most people don't like Niko, over him being a terribly written character. The emphasis of people saying "he says he wants to change, BUT HE KILLS LIKE A THOUSAND PEOPLE! ", that is the ENTIRE fucking point of his character. He is FLAWED and a HYPOCRITE, two human behaviors and traits.

Or they fucked up on the writing of the character. I know it's the point. Doesn't make the execution good.

The goal was to have a very flawed character that muddles in the idea of redemption and starting anew, but the environment he attempts to do that in, only makes him more empty and makes him dig deeper into his own grave, taking those important people around him, with him.

How did they fail? How did the writers fuck up?

This is why conversations about GTA IV don't work, people that genuinely try to understand the intent of the game waste energy with people that want movie parody and satire/slapstick based storytelling, with build your own criminal empire gameplay. It's a huge split in the audience and GTAIV, RDR1, and RDR2 demonstrate that.

RDR1 is full of boring shit like coralling horses. I love boring. Michael's family story is boring. I dig boring. But Niko Bellic is not a good character. In order for a character like that to work you have to harp on his flaws. Like in Taxi Driver, Scorsese clearly shows his spiraling mental state.



In Apocalypse Now you get the intro that shows the main character clearly suffering from PTSD.



In order for a character like Niko to work you have to get more than what they provided. He has to go into his flaws and acknowledge them. The game does a poor job of establishing Niko's flaws. But here's the thing. In a story like this the trick is not only to show the characters flaws but also create empathy surrounding those blemishes. Take the recent Joker film. We know he's mentally ill and has fucked up actions/thoughts. But the movie smartly creates an empathetic case surrounding them to help further contextualize them.

Show me a scene in GTAIV where the game does this for Niko? The game is limited by the fact that the only cutscenes that show up are during and after missions. You don't see how Niko is personally dealing with his hypocrisy or how he even justifies it.

It's just bad.

Good idea, poor execution.

Row was great but the low budget killed it. fun writing and creative missions still weren't enough to offset the way they used the same dull map for three games in a row.

SR1 and 2 map are entirely different. 3 was a different city entirely. 2's map is full of easter eggs and things to explore. Baffling opinion.

3 - 4 - Gat Out of Hell

three games in a row, same map

Oh sorry. I forgot SR4 and Gat Out of Hell exist. For me Saints Row ends with 3.

I'm sorry to tell you, but my cutscenes seeker chip or CPU is broken and I can't find exact cutscenes in a 20-30.hour game to support an argument that will end up not mattering. I've beatan the game many times many years ago, my memory of exact scenes in anything is slipping away due to weed smoking or alcohol use.

GTA IV has depth with it's characters and story. It's fine if people don't care or think it's boring. People simplify or misconstrue many things to fit how they feel, rather than observe what may or may not be true. Many people that play GTAIV feel like it's sluggish shit, I can't say people didn't feel that.

GTA IV resonated with a lot of people, and the reasons why it did can be pretty interesting. The people that shit on GTAIV, their points or arguments are way more boring than anything in GTAIV. Joker is too, so us Apocalypse Now.

[Great Rumbler]

GTAIV really is just not that good. Barely anything to do, dull protagonist, awful controls. Saints Row 2 blew it out of the water.

[Himu]

I'm sorry to tell you, but my cutscenes seeker chip or CPU is broken and I can't find exact cutscenes in a 20-30.hour game to support an argument that will end up not mattering.

ok

[nachobro]

sounds like a concession to me. glad 100% of the thread posters agree that gta4 is ass, rare to come to such a quick and definitive conclusion.

[Himu]

sounds like a concession to me. glad 100% of the thread posters agree that gta4 is ass, rare to come to such a quick and definitive conclusion.

I'm not sure what's more disappointing: GTAIV, FFXIII, or MGS4.