GTA V (There may be spoilers)

[Neomod]

This thread has just 'forced' me to buy Just Cause 2 and re-buy San Andreas for my 360 even though I completed it on my PS2.

Thanks!

[ThickAndCreamy]

I've just read this whole thread through and I really must emphasize how happy I am to see so many people have the same opinion as I do, that GTA IV was a huge, boring disappointment compared to San Andreas. That the 'serious' atmosphere of the game worked poorly, making it have less emotion and heart than San Andreas and generally just being a lot less fun.

San Andreas had parachuting from planes over vast deserts and onto buildings. It had riding motorcycles up mountains just to see how high and far you can fly off. It had jetpacking over cities whilst shooting people below for laughs.

Also, the characters and atmosphere for me were a lot more endearing. It felt incredible riding around gangland areas listening to Dr Dre. or Public Enemy, cruising in a low top vehicle. It had atmosphere and a setting that didn't bore me like IV. GTA IV had nothing like the missions in San Andreas, or the characters for me. It was just brilliant.

Also, the soundtrack, my god;
808 state, Ultramagnetic MC's, Primal Scream, Ice Cube, Dr Dre., N.W.A., Eric B And Rakim, Public Enemy, Big Daddy Kane, Slick Rick, Brand Nubian...

Pretty much sublime. 2 proper golden age hip-hop stations, a house station, a rather good alternative station and so much more.

[Famous Mortimer]

I liked both but I still think Vice City is the best. It has the best soundtrack, a great location, and plenty of humour.

Hells yeah.

GTA IV was dull because of the huge driving sections to get to some of the places, which were neither difficult or picturesque. Just tedious, which is a bit of a no-no for a game series as amazing as GTA.

[mobias]

What's interesting is that I know for a fact Rockstar are well aware of these criticisms so I really can't wait to see what they do next. Unfortunately I think we're in for a long wait. Its possible GTAV will come out next year but I think its more likely we'll see it in 2012. Rockstar North have got Agent coming out in 2011 and I think its unlikely that a studio that isn't actually very big would have two huge games releases in one year but we'll see.... 

[Little Hoover]

But FM GTAIV

Hells yeah.

GTA IV was dull because of the huge driving sections to get to some of the places, which were neither difficult or picturesque. Just tedious, which is a bit of a no-no for a game series as amazing as GTA.

I just got taxi's and skip tripped everywhere, San Andreas, despite being better overall, didn't have this luxury.

[Mister Six]

But FM GTAIV
I just got taxi's and skip tripped everywhere, San Andreas, despite being better overall, didn't have this luxury.

I did that too, but it just led to me not really knowing the layout of the city - whereas I knew Los Santos like the back of my hand, and was pretty well versed with the other cities. And the game, with its far-flung mission start points and dull streets, seemed to be based around the idea that players would use the taxis to get around, so there wasn't much incentive to do otherwise.

[falafel]

OK, so I'm in Reykjavik right now, and I swear, it's perfect for a GTA. It's the right size, you wouldn't need to cut it down at all, and you could have all sorts of fun out in Iceland on glaciers and stuff. Plus there are a few smaller settlements just to mix it up. You could get the whole of Iceland into this game and it would be utterly incredible.

It might sound ridiculous but that might just be the best thing about it.

[Big Jack McBastard]

^ That sounds like an awesome idea.

Gangsters could have their own hot springs rather than tubs!

[ThickAndCreamy]

I'd be up for that.

So long as it isn't just set in a single, huge city. I fucking hate exploring them in real life, so I certainly don't want to in game form. I'd love some lakes, icy mountains and a quad bike, it would be perfect.

[mobias]

Just been reading quite an interesting debate over on one of the GTA fansite forums about whether or not there will infact ever be a GTAV. As Halo Reach has just proved hugely successful games franchises do sometimes have an end point from which games developers understandably want to move on to new things. We know Rockstar North are currently producing Agent and maybe that'll be their new baby at the expense of GTA. I guess there is an argument for them having rung GTA of ideas. Part of me thinks GTAIV proves the answer is yes to that question. They're gone round and done all the iconic US cities which means the question remains - would GTA really work being set out with the US? And are Rockstar in a position to gamble the answer to that question in this day and age on a game that costs 100 million dollars to produce.

[small_world]

Yeah, I've just bought JC2for the XBox360. I hadn't really looked at it until reading through this thread, but it looks amazing. Can't wait to give it a bash. (Won it on eBay for £14, just waiting for the seller to post it)

I love open world games, I really liked the last few GTA's, I loved Fallout 3 and went mad crazy nuts over Oblivion.
I don't really get into games as much now, but when I find something I do like, I can sometiimes get a little bit addicted.

Just a quicky (trying not to derail the thread), does anyone know of anything that's been recently released with the simplicity of Settlers 1 and 2, I had them for the Amiga and I could still play on them now for hours, but I'm looking for something new. I liked the ease of birds eye view, and pointer mouse control. I've played the Sim city games and total commander, stuff like that, but I've never seen anything like the original Settlers games.

[Puffin Chunks]

Not new, but have you tried Rise of Nations?

I was also a big fan of The Settlers and I thoroughly enjoy Rise of Nations. I still play both from time to time.

Edit: And in case you haven't, here's a preview of the game from *gulp* 2002 which draws some comparisons with The Settlers:
http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/354/354570p1.html

[Mister Six]

Just a warning: JC2 lacks the attention to detail that GTA and (especially) Fallout 3 have. Treat it as a sandbox Michael Bay film, however, and you should be happy.

Part of me thinks GTAIV proves the answer is yes to that question. They're gone round and done all the iconic US cities which means the question remains - would GTA really work being set out with the US? And are Rockstar in a position to gamble the answer to that question in this day and age on a game that costs 100 million dollars to produce.

Not sure GTAIV has rung the death knell for that franchise just yet. The massive sales are incentive alone for the series to keep going. It doesn't make financial sense to stop now. Yes they've run out of almost all the really notable US cities[nb]New Orleans is one that would make a brilliant setting - I actually suggested it to a mate at Rockstar Leeds and suggested he put it forward as a basis for the new DS game they were making at the time, but it was just after the Katrina debacle and he said it might be seen as being in poor taste. They ended up making Chinatown Wars.[/nb] but they could broaden it out by doing, say, GTA:UK and setting it in an ersatz version of London and Sussex. I reckon that would work well. Then ones for Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore... all the cities that have some cred in the Western world.

The GTA brand alone would carry it at the start, and if the gameplay was as engrossing and varied as San Andreas's it might give the franchise a fresh injection of blood.

[Lt Plonker]

They did a 60s London one. I'd like to see that fully realised on the 360. Shooting around a 60s London in a Mini or whatever, with the Kinks blasting out of the radio, possibly some sort of Pirate Radio station. Bit pissed at the moment, sorry.

[small_world]

Not new, but have you tried Rise of Nations?

I'm taking a look at this now. It looks similar to Total Annihilation and Comand and Conquer, both games I also loved, so I might have to throw some money its way.

[Pepotamo1985]

I'm in two minds about GTA4. On the one hand the graphics were just endlessly beautiful, and the depiction of New York city was so painfully accurate that, as someone who got the game a few days after I returned from a trip to New York, I was often prone to popping like a true mark and just marvelling at how accurate they'd got it all. I loved how vast it was and how they'd almost perfectly nailed the exact look and feel of every individual borough of NYC. However, its vastness was also a pain, and I found myself more often than not just hopping in a cab and skipping the trip everywhere. On the other hand, the overall feel of the game is very haphazard - as has already been noted, there's a bizarre contradiction in having typically funny talk radio stations (and some of them are absolutely hilarious, the right wing pundit station especially) but an overbearing emphasis on seriousness and 'realism'. Just how easy it was to attract police attention was a real nuisance as well - obviously it had been done to redress just how ridiculous the things you could get away with without getting wanted stars were in Vice City and San Andreas, but seriously, why try to rectify something very few people presumably saw as a fault by going directly to the other end of the spectrum?

I completely agree with the criticism of the missions - they were incredibly repetitive. However, the three missions variants on show (1. 'drive somewhere - kill someone - drive away - get chased by cops/get chased by gang members', 2. 'Chase someone somewhere - kill them', 3. 'Enter building - kill people - escape - kill people') are essentially the classic GTA mission formula, and always have been. The only difference is that previously games had lots of fun stuff do in between doing missions and once all missions were complete. In GTA4, there were just endless, endless, endless reams of pretty much identical missions (with no comic relief or fun tasks to complete betwixt them). Some of them were absolutely infuriating as well, especially the missions where you had to chase people on bikes. The bike handling was fucking terrible (and I actually really liked the driving controls in this game) and I had to redo these missions more than I'd ever had to retry any other mission in any previous GTA game.

I wasn't such a big fan of San Andreas because it was fucking massive and there seemed to be too much going on - they'd thrown in loads of new innovations and features without actually bothering to give them a purpose. It was pretty fun though, obviously. I still stand by Vice City as the best GTA sandbox game - I fucking loved the 80s feel, the graphics were superb for the time, and the story was immensely fun - THAT'S how you do a game about gangsters and not make it dull.

[mobias]

I wasn't such a big fan of San Andreas because it was fucking massive and there seemed to be too much going on - they'd thrown in loads of new innovations and features without actually bothering to give them a purpose. It was pretty fun though, obviously. I still stand by Vice City as the best GTA sandbox game - I fucking loved the 80s feel, the graphics were superb for the time, and the story was immensely fun - THAT'S how you do a game about gangsters and not make it dull.

I agree about Vice City setting the benchmark for GTA, in terms of atmosphere anyway. In terms of game play though I think San Andreas really pushed the whole concept of GTA way further, way further in fact than GTAIV did. I think that's why GTAIV really lost favour with so many gamers who didn't appreciate its attention to detail. In terms of game there was just so much less of it. I've been playing Red Dead Redemption a lot recently and its just so much more refined and the online experience is in a different league to GTAIV.   

[ThickAndCreamy]

For the last week or so I've been replaying GTA IV and trying to complete it since the first time I gave up halfway through out of boredom. This time I've given up three-quarters of the way through out of boredom. It really is a terrifically dull game, where I feel no allegiance to characters and do not care at all about the story. It has some great set pieces but it really just did nothing for me at all yet again. It's such a detailed game, and the radio stations are magnificent, but the game play is just getting too derivative. It's been mentioned so many times before but every mission really does just seem to be drive-shoot-drive-shoot-run-shoot-drive or essentially involving driving somewhere then killing some people or destroying vehicles. I just couldn't handle having to do this for another 10 hours to complete a game where I don't care about the conclusion.

I think I may have just gone off GTA forever now, either that or IV is a very boring exception. I know the above has been paraphrased throughout the thread but for me it deserves repeating, it's just depressing really how I now hate what was once my favourite gaming series ever (joint-tied with Timesplitters).

[Subtle Mocking]

I think it is just a very dull exception. Rockstar really did emphasise the realism aspect of the game, which meant that the fun, wacky aspect of the game that was found in VC et al was completely lost.

RDR gave me a bit of hope for the next GTA game, because it was so much more fun and varied than GTA, and deserved the praise a lot more than GTA did. I just fear that we'll have this trend of sandbox games being drive-shoot-run-drive-repeat for a few more years to come (Mafia II being a recent dreadful example).

[Pepotamo1985]

I have friends who are GTA fiends (100% completion on every sandbox - and they actually leave the house regularly) who were finding the 'drive somewhere - shoot some people - drive away (perhaps pursued)' dynamic tired by San Andreas, but still found the games immense fun. I don't know, Vice City, instead of being a hyper realistic, vast landscape, was actively fun to drive around in - compact enough to learn the geography of quickly, but varied enough for the numerous areas to individual character (and there to be scope for finding little areas or nuggets every now and then). I played Vice City to absolute death when I had a PS2, and redownloaded a PC version during uni, and played it to death again then - I could probably still have fun doing it. By removing great swathes of the fun, and making the city just endlessly sprawling, Rockstar slaughtered the charm of the first few sandbox games - now it really is just an excuse to brutalise prostitutes and run people over. The new game engine is pretty sweet, but they're going to have to expand on that even further to salvage anything out of a future GTA. I'll probably still buy it though, and complain.

I'm fairly sure Graham Linehan mentions the fact that GTA 4 was clearly written by people who'd been watching The Wire a lot. Or maybe he didn't. I definitely heard someone important say so though, and they're right.

[Little Hoover]

Linehan said it's written by people who watch a lot films rather than read a lot of books or something to that effect.

Don't get your comment that it now really is just an excuse to brutalise prostitutes and run people over. Does anyone even really care about the prostitutes in GTA anymore, I mean I went to see what they'd do with the prostitutes in GTA IV a couple of times just as a sort of token gesture to try it out because you can, but I'd be surprised if it could still be exciting to anyone that's played GTA games before.


It's true that GTA IV seemed to be trying to grab onto some of the success of the wire somewhat, but it seemed to largely miss the point in that every character in the wire no matter how morally dubious they may seem to you, you can kind of accept why they live the way they do and why they act that way no matter what they do.

Whereas GTA IV shouts at you "Look at this guy, look how evil he is, looks he's really mean, he's a bully, he kills people for no reason, he's on coke, he's sexist, chauvinistic, he's homophobic but he's probably also gay as well, which is even worse!" For all its attempts at giving you morally ambiguous decisions to make, the antagonists in the game were clearly all pure evil. The wire didn't even really divide its characters into groups marked "antagonists" and "protagonists"

Ballad of Gay Tony was probably the worst for this, despite putting fun missions back into the game, everyone except luis & tony were so utterly hateful and annoying the story just became incredibly depressing.

[mobias]

Its interesting how much everyone has the same criticisms of GTAIV  http://www.gamesradar.com/f/grand-theft-auto-5-what-we-want-to-see/a-20100921115755932099

[ThickAndCreamy]

That article and the top 7 things GTA IV needs made me smile huge amounts. I'm very happy a large number of people agree with this, and that the primary objective of GTA is fun, not creating a serious, dense story (which they have failed to do in anything other than in an extremely simplistic manner).

[Benjie Trufflesnort]

Why does everyone have a problem with the cars' handling? That baffles me. I could fly along at top notch between two lines of moving traffic with no problem and turn 90 degree handbrakes with ease. Is everyone just rubbish?

[ThickAndCreamy]

I found the cars to be no problem either handling wise, you get used to it very quickly and I had some fun dodging cars at extreme speed without crashing many-a-time. I would still love nitro back again though, it was good for some insane riding (although mainly in the rural areas).

Also I really, really need to highlight this. I've just been looking on GTA V forums and they've created some highly detailed ideas and art, insanely detailed really. You seriously need to look at what they've made as concepts for the next game, it's just unreal. They've created stories, characters, maps, radio stations, guns, vehicles and so much more;

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=440880

[Little Hoover]

The car handling took a bit of getting used to, but it was for the better, those complaints just strike me as people hating change.

[small_world]

^^Fucking geeks... Get a jobbbby.

But yeah, some of those suggestions are awesome, I'd love it if they placed the game 50-100 years in the future.
Nothing crazy, just some new technologies, hover cars alongside normal cars (all cars would be electric powered, and for the first time you'd need to keep an eye on the fuel).
A teleportation device (like on the GB forum here).
Some awesome guns.
Some awesome planes..

It could be played out on earth, all of it.... Or what's left of it, after water levels have risen... OOooh... And a space station.

[mobias]

To sit annoyingly on the fence with my views towards the driving in GTAIV I will say that it was one part a work of gaming genius and another part irritating as hell. What was amazing about it was that Rockstar deliberately made it subtly difficult so you would really have to develop your skill to become good at driving but once your had become good in theory you would really stay good. But what was also annoyingly hell about it was that if you didn't play GTAIV all the time your skills as a driver would never improve fast enough for you to really enjoy fast driving in the game as much as you had in past GTA's. If you remember a car like the Cheetah in VC and San Andreas it really stuck to the road, you could fly round corners at breakneck speed escaping the cops safe in the knowledge that you weren't going to land on your roof. It all comes back to the realism verses the fun.
On the whole though the driving physics in all the GTA's has been utterly amazing. Note how badly most other driving games or open world games do it in comparison. I mean the driving physics in Just Cause 2 are a joke.

That map of a new VC is funny. I can't see massive areas of marshland providing much fun for anything. They won't be going back to Vice City again with the next one. I don't know why so many die hard GTA fans want to revisit somewhere that has already been done brilliantly before in the very recent past. Some people have no imagination.  Anyway Rockstar aren't stupid, it would be artistic suicide to do Vice City again. It would be the gaming equivalent of them remaking 2001 with better special effects. Some things just don't need to be re-hashed.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

I had an idea for a GTA set in the era of Vietnam, Watergate, Woodstock etc. If they hadn't started afresh with GTA4, it could have included younger versions of characters form the previous games. Even with that done and dusted though, I think that would make for a great setting, what with all the cars, music and films from back then.

Also, I tried playing GTA4 again recently and still thought the driving was no fun.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Its interesting how much everyone has the same criticisms of GTAIV  http://www.gamesradar.com/f/grand-theft-auto-5-what-we-want-to-see/a-20100921115755932099

I agree with a lot of that, but I like driving in GTAIV, and they have missed out "More interiors", which I think is the biggest key to breathing new life into the GTA franchise. It's frustrating to drive past loads of cool looking places, but not be able to go in.

Also, I'm quite happy to stick with a contemporary time period.