inselaffe on 24/10/2009 at 19:12
It's not missing the point at all. gta4 from style alone you can tell is not meant to be taken seriously. Anyone who goes into a gta game expecting that is quite clearly missing the point themselves.
Even playing the thing for 5 minutes you can see the same style that has been there since the start of the series. The only difference is that it is slightly more grounded - but only very slightly and in certain aspects. If that offends you and makes you think it wants you to take it seriously then so be it.
Also, the driving is perfectly fun and functional - more so in fact.
Taffer36 on 24/10/2009 at 20:17
Quote Posted by inselaffe
It's not missing the point at all.
Yes, you are.
I'm on your side that GTA 4 was a great game, and I happen to think that the combination of serious and comical aspects was handled SUPERBLY, but you can at least understand the point that they're making. You can argue that the opposing styles are meshed together well, but you can't try to argue that there aren't two opposing styles, because there very clear are.
Although you are correct in that the driving is much, much improved. I went back and played Vice City again yesterday. Holy shit,
the driving is ass. Sure, it's easier to hold down forward and make it to your destination, but what's the point? It's not enjoyable in the slightest, and as a result my interest in continuing in the game is immediately hurt.
inselaffe on 24/10/2009 at 22:16
Quote Posted by Taffer36
Yes, you are.
I'm on your side that GTA 4 was a great game, and I happen to think that the combination of serious and comical aspects was handled SUPERBLY, but you can at least understand the point that they're making. You can argue that the opposing styles are meshed together well, but you can't try to argue that there aren't two opposing styles, because there very clear are.
No i'm not - they are saying that the game should be taken completely seriously, where as i note that although certain aspects are more grounded and serious, it still has the trademark gta silliness edge and style. As you say, it's a mix of two styles but it certainly isn't meant to be taken completely seriously, which is what people are moaning about here.
SubJeff on 25/10/2009 at 00:38
I submit the motion that the comedy and the grimness act to amplify each other by juxtaposition.
In addition GTA gets stick from the moral brigade (think of the kids!) and the serious stuff is both because, well that's the direction its gone because it is for a mature audience, and to say "actually this game has a serious plot and isn't for kids so shut up" and stuff.
I told someone about the plot the othe day and they were all "but kids play these! Omg!"
Nnnnnnng!
gunsmoke on 25/10/2009 at 18:45
Kids also manage to get their hands on porn, as well. Doesn't mean they were the intended audience.
Andarthiel on 27/10/2009 at 11:19
Haven't really played it because I don't own a next gen console and let's face it, the PC version doesn't really have a reputation of running well on anything below a supercomputer. In general, I love the GTA series but looks like they really screwed this one over.
henke on 27/10/2009 at 11:38
Only two days to go! :D
EvaUnit02 on 27/10/2009 at 13:21
Quote Posted by inselaffe
No i'm not - they are saying that the game should be taken completely seriously, where as i note that although certain aspects are more grounded and serious, it still has the trademark gta silliness edge and style.
My God, you're one colossal fucking idiot, DAN KNOTT. You've been entirely off the mark this whole time.
The point was that those of us who loved the OTT, tongue-in-cheek GTAs on the PS2 era hardware are lamenting that the style of old, which dominated the CORE GAMEPLAY and not just the background flavour (i.e. radio stations, billboards) had mostly been replaced with something that's more grounded in realism. The arcadey pick up and play fun factor is largely gone from the Single Player (eg the harshness the driving physics, how particularly difficult in can be to elude the police, etc) and a lot of the fun sandbox elements that pervaded San Andreas especially, has been replaced with rubbish like the tedious social simulator claptrap (i.e. going on "play-dates" with buddies).
inselaffe on 27/10/2009 at 14:49
The thing is you whine mostly about the driving and also about the story / atmosphere.
The driving is much improved and all the crying about it seems to be down to "waaaaaaaaah it's too hard, HOW DARE THEY". It's not hard at all, it's still very much arcade, it's not trying to be realistic but it is actually asking you to brake for once. Perhaps if you played it using a keyboard i could understand as with no analogue that can take some getting used to but certainly with analogue there is no problem at all. Complaining about the driving is stupid.
They have drastically improved a core attraction of the game with the driving and all you can do is bitch and moan about it. I never want to hear you moan about anything being "dumbed down" again because here when a developer actually goes out there to try and make it more interesting you lot tantrum then. No wonder there is no pleasing you. Even casuals appreciate the driving. It's not grand prix legends for crying out loud, it doesn't even pretend to be realistic. It is a really nice mix of arcade with a tiny "hint" of realism and it works well.
No the point that got me when moaning about the story and atmosphere is that you then hold san andreas up on a pedestal. That game was the utterly tasteless and awful in respect to those aspects. San andreas was predominately trying to appear cool to its new audience. Sure they put the stupid stuff in too, but the "luk at r kool new game wiggas!" 'seriousness' aspect of it was cringeworthy and offputting. (Yes it wasn't serious but it was an attempt to try to increase appeal). Contrast this with countless posts on the pits of gta forums complaining about the main character in gta4 being "mexican" when the game was previewed and it sums it up. Quite how they thought nico was mexican i don't know, but then that speaks volumes.
San andreas was the first time that gta went into a game and tried to have the setting appear cool rather than just taking the piss out of the setting (which it still did too).
You moan about the phone calls and stuff - well from what i heard you can ignore them. (Yes I only played a few missions and mainly drove around a bit but i can see from that that it is better).
The city feels more alive, which was always a complaint about the old gtas.
There was the same nagging calling you up in san andreas though too so to be honest i don't get what you're on about there. You can ignore it so what's the problem.
What fun sandbox elements do you miss that have been removed? I must say i haven't played enough to know what's gone. However i think they have certainly added other different sandbox elements in gta 4 - like the darts and so on but i never got so far as to try them.
A lot of the complaints seem to be very conversative and just because it's not a carbon copy of the old games with better graphics. Yes it's not completely silly but it's still silly enough to be perfectly honest. Or does the everything have to be completely obvious for you.
For out and out silliness there is saints row anyway.
In regard to the cutscenes, they seemed just as tongue in cheek as the other 3d gtas. Admittedly I only got as far as the first few missions and watched a friend play some other missions however it didn't seem particularly serious to me - or infact any different from how they were in previous games.
When the game boils down to it, it's still gta, and you can still do what you like and it's just as much a sandbox game, but just cos it looks a tiny bit different and has tried to add a bit to the series and made the silliness more subtle you have to have a hissy fit.
Iroquois on 27/10/2009 at 15:34
Quote Posted by inselaffe
The driving is much improved and all the crying about it seems to be down to "waaaaaaaaah it's too hard, HOW DARE THEY". It's not hard at all, it's still very much arcade, it's not trying to be realistic but it is actually asking you to brake for once.
Are you purposefully dense? It feels HEAVY. It's uncomfortable. In how many other ways do I have to put it for you to get the point. It's a chore. The only time it becomes passable is when you satisfy your fantasies of driving around New York with no aim. In the actual missions it's shit. Having to maneuver a heavy car (and that is only with the good ones, the big or old ones are fucking impossible), while fiddling with the shoulder buttons to adjust the speed, while holding L1 to shoot, while playing with the right analog stick to see around is NOT good game design.
Quote Posted by inselaffe
No the point that got me when moaning about the story and atmosphere is that you then hold san andreas up on a pedestal. That game was the utterly tasteless and awful in respect to those aspects.
I personally loathe San Andreas. I like it a LOT less than GTAIV. Does that make my opinion any more valid now?
Quote Posted by inselaffe
You moan about the phone calls and stuff - well from what i heard you can ignore them. (Yes I only played a few missions and mainly drove around a bit but i can see from that that it is better).
You're missing the point again. You can ignore them, yes, but they're practically the only other thing you can do in the game, outside of missions and a few side-jobs. The calls are all the sandbox fun the game gives you.
Quote Posted by inselaffe
What fun sandbox elements do you miss that have been removed? I must say i haven't played enough to know what's gone. However i think they have certainly added other different sandbox elements in gta 4 - like the darts and so on but i never got so far as to try them.
The idea that you buy a video game about stealing cars and you spend half of it playing darts or pool is mind-numbing to begin with. It becomes about fifty times worse when you buy a videogame to play a videogame inside the videogame.
Hey, at least that godawful Gym bullcrap's gone.
Quote Posted by inselaffe
In regard to the cutscenes, they seemed just as tongue in cheek as the other 3d gtas. Admittedly I only got as far as the first few missions and watched a friend play some other missions however it didn't seem particularly serious to me - or infact any different from how they were in previous games.
Well, Tommy Vercetti never spent time skulking about what a monster he had become, only to go out and kill half the population of the city in the following mission.
Quote Posted by inselaffe
When the game boils down to it, it's still gta, and you can still do what you like and it's just as much a sandbox game, but just cos it looks a tiny bit different and has tried to add a bit to the series and made the silliness more subtle you have to have a hissy fit.
Hey, at least some of us have hissy fits over the game. You have hissy fits over our hissy fits.
