mothra on 25/10/2011 at 15:27
I only trust them to deliver a bug'n'drm-riddled, unoptimized pc version a year later. GTA4 was imo like the worst part in the series (gameplay&story), no matter how cool the tech at the time.
EvaUnit02 on 25/10/2011 at 15:31
Just not having any of the tedious social simulator crap from vanilla GTA4 would be a step in the right direction, IMO.
I was playing The Lost and Damned earlier this week and you know what, I didn't miss any of the the pseudo-RPG feature bloat from San Andreas at all. Weight management, fitness/stamina levels, having to eat, etc. they made the right move removing that from GTA4.
Taking SA's irritating dating and making that basically the entire fucking sandbox outside of campaign missions in GTA4 though... fuck the social sim crap hard. "NIKO, LET'S GO BOWLING NOW OR I NO LOVE YOU ANY MORE!"
mothra on 25/10/2011 at 15:54
I did not like the dress and work-out routine of SA either but at least it was more fun gameplay/mechanics-wise imo. My favorite is Vice City though. Niko just annoyed the hell out of me.
henke on 25/10/2011 at 16:00
You didn't have to manage your weight or eat in SA. You could, if you wanted to.
I didn't like how people kept calling me in GTA4 either, but you could always just turn your phone off y'know.
For GTA5 I hope they stick to the formulas set by VC&SA. Keep the tech from GTA4 and just add more stuff and make it bigger.
Sulphur on 25/10/2011 at 16:55
GTA IV was... okay. Ish. The formula is getting stale, and with all the SO SERIOUS attached to IV's narrative, it started to lose its attraction.
The dichotomy between player agenda and the plot's agenda doesn't let the two mesh, never did, but since Vice City was as hilariously fun as it was, it was never a terribly big issue. However, it's been becoming more and more egregious the more they railroad the story in one direction, and IV was the nadir of story-based open-world gaming because the sense of fun and being tongue-in-cheek was ripped out from the main plot without any care or concern.
V had better attempt a realistic choice/consequence system its Thing To Have if they continue down this road, or else they're just going to be spinning their wheels and going nowhere fast.
EvaUnit02 on 25/10/2011 at 17:16
Quote Posted by Sulphur
The dichotomy between player agenda and the plot's agenda doesn't let the two mesh, never did, but since Vice City was as hilariously fun as it was, it was never a terribly big issue. However, it's been becoming more and more egregious the more they railroad the story in one direction, and IV was the nadir of story-based open-world gaming because the sense of fun and being tongue-in-cheek was ripped out from the main plot without any care or concern.
Very much agreed. They was often a huge schism between the player's actions during gameplay and Niko's during the scripted campaign.
I'm playing like a psycho who drives recklessly and murders bystanders without a second thought. Niko in the storyline was initially trying (really unsuccessfully) to put his former life of crime and violence behind him and to make a new start.
If anything GTA is increasingly becoming more like linear JRPGs as time goes by.
Ulukai on 25/10/2011 at 17:29
For me, Vice City is also yet to be bettered.
Miami. Ridiculous trousers. Yellow Lambo. 99 Red Balloons. Massive amounts of fun.
Done.
Thirith on 25/10/2011 at 17:36
As long as we get more interesting geography than Vice City... That place was painfully flat. Give me San Fierro any day. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't mind a GTA set in '60s or '70s San Fierro.
demagogue on 25/10/2011 at 23:28
I don't know why they'd set it in LA/Los Santos again. GTA:SA wasn't that long ago and they just set LA Noire there. They could set it in a fictional Chicago maybe, or London if they want pedigree.