Post by: MaryJane on December 06, 2007, 09:29:52 AM
Is it just me or do the people have an "outlined" effect to them through the majority of the trailer?? It looks weird to me like their cut outs or something, or their blocking whats behind them idk maybe it's just me.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 05:05:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: MaryJane
Excuse me if there was an old GTA IV thread somewhere, but I just have a specific question, you can watch the trailer here.
Is it just me or do the people have an "outlined" effect to them through the majority of the trailer?? It looks weird to me like their cut outs or something, or their blocking whats behind them idk maybe it's just me.
I think the game looks blah at best, heck the visuals don't even look that good not to mention the framerate looks terrible. Though I've heard that some think it looks like a CGI movie. I don't see the game looking much better than Saint's Row or the myriad of other sandbox style games on 360.
Post by: Kairon on December 07, 2007, 05:41:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Though I've heard that some think it looks like a CGI movie.
Hmmm?
Post by: Stogi on December 07, 2007, 05:48:13 AM
You guys can hate all you want on the graphix, but I remember playing the original GTA with the top-down view in 7th grade not giving a ratsass how ugly it was. It seriously looks like a dope movie that you play.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 05:51:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KashogiStogi
This.....game.....looks.......incredible.
You guys can hate all you want on the graphix, but I remember playing the original GTA with the top-down view in 7th grade not giving a ratsass how ugly it was. It seriously looks like a dope movie that you play.
A dope movie with a poor framerate, that tries to be cool and is basically the exact same thing we've been getting since GTA3. Kill hookers, become a crime lord and watch the framerate drop to -100, proving that Rockstar is one of the most uninspired popular developers around who can do anything good without pushing supposed adult themes.
Post by: Kairon on December 07, 2007, 06:22:56 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 06:24:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I don't think that Rockstar and the GTA series deserves this vitriol. They have a consistent vision that they're pushing, and their execution is always exciting. It could be said that GTA 3 was as seminal a videogame event as Mario 64 in terms of copycats and thematic impact on other games.
Their vision, be as vile as possible with getting censored with a theme that has been beaten to death. A good company continues to innovate, Rockstar hasn't done anything close to that since GTA3. They are a one trick pony whether you want to admit it or not, and that trick will fail to impress. To compare GTA3 to Mario 64 is ridiculous, all GTA3 brought to the table was a sandbox style game that impacted nothing but sandbox style games, while Mario 64 set the standard for all 3D games in both control, camera, and non-linear gameplay (So in a way GTA3 is just expanding on a precedent that Mario 64 started).
Let's say for arguments sake though that GTA3 was this great Mario 64 esque game. What has Rockstar really done since then? Created upgraded "clones" of GTA with more stuff to do? They tried their hand at a western game which sucked, they tried their hand at a stealth game in Manhunt that was terrible, they tried their hand at a beat em up (State of the Emergency) which was atrocious, they had a racing game that was decent but nothing special, and they even tried to make a ping pong game which was sadly probably their best game besides the GTA series and maybe Bully (But once again is basically a toned down GTA). So I stick by my statement, they are a shallow company that lucked out with GTA and have been sucking off it ever since.
Post by: Kairon on December 07, 2007, 06:48:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
So I stick by my statement, they are a shallow company that lucked out with GTA and have been sucking off it ever since.
But isn't that par for the course in this industry?
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 07, 2007, 06:48:32 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 06:59:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
So I stick by my statement, they are a shallow company that lucked out with GTA and have been sucking off it ever since.
But isn't that par for the course in this industry?
True, though some of the great companies like Square, Capcom and Konami have managed to shake up the industry. Rockstar, has been all about GTA, and really that is starting to slip away because the industry is finally catching on how to make BETTER sandbox style games. Really though, the formula can only go so far, you can only get so "real" before things start getting boring. Will I get GTA4? Probably, but I honestly don't expect an amazing experience. I expect the Madden syndrome which I define as "Basically an updated version of the previous game outdating that old game".
Post by: Kairon on December 07, 2007, 07:07:22 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 07:22:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
It's strange that I'm defending a game I've never owned... lol. And I'd probably not be able to finish a GTA game all the way to the end if I did own one... either from getting burned out on it, bored, or just because I suck at games in general.
What is even more funny is that I've OWNED and OWN all the GTA games since GTA3.
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 07, 2007, 07:25:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
It's strange that I'm defending a game I've never owned... lol. And I'd probably not be able to finish a GTA game all the way to the end if I did own one... either from getting burned out on it, bored, or just because I suck at games in general.
You definitely get burnt out on that game. I played all the way through GTA Vice City before any of the others and by the time I was done with that, I had enough of GTA for a good long while. I still haven't really played much of GTA 3. I played part of Saints Row for the 360 and got about half way through it before I got tired of it. They are long games where you do the same thing over and over and over. It just grows tiring, and at this point the novelty of the series has just worn off (for me at least).
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 07, 2007, 07:25:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
It's strange that I'm defending a game I've never owned... lol. And I'd probably not be able to finish a GTA game all the way to the end if I did own one... either from getting burned out on it, bored, or just because I suck at games in general.
What is even more funny is that I've OWNED and OWN all the GTA games since GTA3.
THE IRONY!!!
Post by: Kairon on December 07, 2007, 07:34:45 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
It's strange that I'm defending a game I've never owned... lol. And I'd probably not be able to finish a GTA game all the way to the end if I did own one... either from getting burned out on it, bored, or just because I suck at games in general.
What is even more funny is that I've OWNED and OWN all the GTA games since GTA3.
We were made for each other.
Post by: Stogi on December 07, 2007, 09:39:38 AM
To be fair, I've only played GTA3, so I'm looking forward to the next TRUE installment. It looks.....well.......like a huge upgraded GTA3; and that's ok with me. Honestly, I shouldn't have even mentioned the "dope movie" part, because odds are, I won't be even playing it for the story. Same thing has held true for all the GTA's I've played; especially the original.
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 07, 2007, 11:02:30 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KashogiStogi
I never owned a GTA
I can understand general excitement and interest if you have never owned some sort of GTA game. It is just so overdone for me that I can equate it with WW2 shooters. I'm tired of them and I wish they would stop doing the idea to death.
Post by: DAaaMan64 on December 07, 2007, 11:10:14 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 07, 2007, 11:13:07 AM
That's a really nice way to put churning out the same game over and over... =3
As for the trailer, it's almost all cutscenes, which doesn't help to clarify any new gameplay changes or fixes from previous games (like the horrible fighting/aiming system Rockstar refuses to fix), so I can't comment on that...
Post by: ThePerm on December 07, 2007, 11:37:58 AM
and i do agree, while I was watching the movie I was thinking about how I played the original back in junior high, and its amazing to see how far we've come. Commenting on the framerate isn't even fair at this point because the game isn't even out yet. Things could change.
Post by: Kairon on December 07, 2007, 12:14:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
"They have a consistent vision that they're pushing"
That's a really nice way to put churning out the same game over and over... =3
Not really. I meant to say that they've admittedly wanted to create games that felt like realizations of movies (or their favorite movies, at least). This is why one of their games is actually a remake of a 70's movie (Warriors) and why this latest GTA IV trailer almost feels paced like a movie trailer.
Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
Rockstar is not a one trick pony, back when they were called DMA they made Lemmings. All this talk about Rockstar's unoriginality parallels what Sony, Microsoft fan-boys say about Zelda OOT vs Zelda TP.
And not just that, they also gave us the wildly inventive Space Station Silicon Valley and Body harvest on the N64. I <3 Body Harvest.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 12:20:41 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
Rockstar is not a one trick pony, back when they were called DMA they made Lemmings. All this talk about Rockstar's unoriginality parallels what Sony, Microsoft fan-boys say about Zelda OOT vs Zelda TP
and i do agree, while I was watching the movie I was thinking about how I played the original back in junior high, and its amazing to see how far we've come. Commenting on the framerate isn't even fair at this point because the game isn't even out yet. Things could change.
Yeah and what has Rockstar done lately? That is what I thought. In regards to the Zelda OOT vs Zelda: TP at least you feel like going back to Zelda: OOT, the GTA series you only care about the next game, the old one becomes outdated, that is not what I call an amazing series which is why I liken it to Madden. Not to mention that even taking that comparison as the truth, would mean that Zelda is the only series Nintendo has made that was worth a crap, which is NOT the case. Rockstar has GTA, that is it, they were nothing more than an average developer before GTA3 and are nothing more than an average developer now.
The only developer I can think of off the top of my head that is comparable to Rockstar is the one trick pony crew at Factor 5. They have the Rogue Squadron series and can't do anything else, when they try it is subpar (Even Lair was bad and it wasn't that much different in mechanics from Rogue Squadron?).
Post by: ShyGuy on December 07, 2007, 12:36:30 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 07, 2007, 12:53:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I still want to buy Bully when it comes out for the Wii.
I'll get it for Wii, it is basically a toned down GTA but still a fun game.
Post by: MaryJane on December 08, 2007, 02:45:39 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on December 08, 2007, 04:51:55 PM
WHOSE THE BLEEDING EDGE NOW HATERS?
Post by: Kairon on December 08, 2007, 07:30:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I still want to buy Bully when it comes out for the Wii.
I'll get it for Wii, it is basically a toned down GTA but still a fun game.
Already reserved. You should too. Support our third parties. Yay. ::waves flag::
Post by: Enner on December 08, 2007, 09:17:20 PM
Speaking of the gameplay, DMA (well Rockstar North or whatever they're called now) seems to be really pushing more realism with this proper sequel. From what I read from the previews, cars take time to steal, guns are bought discretely from the boot of a car, and Nico's cellphone plays a heavy role communicating with bosses and luring targets. However, all that nifty stuff won't mean much to me if it isn't easy to shoot and kill. I never did like how combat felt in GTA3. Always I thought, "oh god, just give me a proper and simple dual analog set up". That's something that made Mercenaries: Playground of Destruction a joy to play (that, and airstrikes).
It seems that there are alot more indoor places than I remembered being in GTA3. I think that is a very nice thing for the series. Hopefully, there will be more sticking and deep consequences, whether they are strictly plot triggered or a bit more spontaneous. From my experiences with the series, it bothered me that you didn't have much of an effect on the world and vice versa. Then again, I can't really think of what I'm after by saying that.
As for the framerate, I never dwelled on its obvious choppiness when watching the trailer. Damn, I got to engossed to the music and dialogue.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on December 09, 2007, 07:44:13 AM
PROVE ME WRONG
Oh wait, you can't. So stop complaining about Rockstar doing the same thing over and over again when Nintendo is the king of rehashing.
New trailer makes me more excited about the game than I was before. Music was a perfect fit, and I think this game is going to have even better characters than the previous incarnations.
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 09, 2007, 08:07:39 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 09, 2007, 08:48:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
Mario Galaxy is Mario 64 2.0.
PROVE ME WRONG
Oh wait, you can't. So stop complaining about Rockstar doing the same thing over and over again when Nintendo is the king of rehashing.
New trailer makes me more excited about the game than I was before. Music was a perfect fit, and I think this game is going to have even better characters than the previous incarnations.
Now that is a pathetic comparison, Rockstar hasn't innovated GTA since GTA3, they add more stuff but that is it. Each Mario has been a self contained game that does different things each series, and Galaxy flips the genre on its head, not to mention NONE of NIntendo's games outdate the previous ones because are unique, and yes special experiences. All GTA fans care about is the next game, so they can shelve the previous one like Madden fans wait for the next game so they can shelve the previous game. Not to mention Nintendo has revolutionized and shown how genres should be done, what has Rockstar done besides GTA3? That is right, nothing, heck they can't even polish their games, they are chalk full of glitches and some of the most piss poor aiming controls around.
This doesn't even cover the fact that Rockstar is a one trick pony while Nintendo is one of the most diverse developers around when it comes to creating games.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on December 09, 2007, 09:02:18 AM
GTA: Vice City was GTA 3 with motorcycles, flyable aircraft, and set in Miami.
Vice City and San Andreas weren't even true sequels, which is why this one is being called GTA 4 instead of GTA 6. You can't tell everything about the game from a two minute trailer, contrary to whatever you may believe.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 09, 2007, 01:39:02 PM
Post by: Dirk Temporo on December 09, 2007, 02:18:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
So it's just a series of expansion packs? PSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHH
Well, yeah. They made that pretty clear. They have, multiple times, come out and said "Vice City is not GTA4. Vice City is a continuation of GTA3."
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 09, 2007, 02:51:38 PM
Post by: Mario on December 09, 2007, 06:49:37 PM
Quote
Rockstar hasn't innovated GTA since GTA3
LOL! Maybe because that was the last installment.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on December 10, 2007, 12:22:11 AM
Seasons would be cool too. It would be awesome if it could snow. But that's probably a pipe dream.
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 10, 2007, 01:19:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
Mario Galaxy is Mario 64 2.0.
I wish that was true...
Mario Galaxy < (Mario 64 2.0 == Mario Sunshine)
Post by: Dirk Temporo on December 10, 2007, 06:50:37 AM
Post by: ryancoke on December 10, 2007, 08:28:38 AM
As far as this Mario vs GTA orginality contest, I would say both are not entirely original. Mario Galaxy is a platformer (although a damn good one) and GTA4 is a sandbox crime game. At least GTA isn't whored out to every other genre like Mario is. I'm pretty sure Nintendo is working on "Mario, Amature Mushroom Land Gynecologist" and "Mario's Repo Man Fiesta"
Post by: SixthAngel on December 10, 2007, 11:59:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
Mario Galaxy is Mario 64 with better levels and unique gravity puzzles.
GTA: Vice City was GTA 3 with motorcycles, flyable aircraft, and set in Miami.
Vice City and San Andreas weren't even true sequels, which is why this one is being called GTA 4 instead of GTA 6. You can't tell everything about the game from a two minute trailer, contrary to whatever you may believe.
The only thing that makes them not true sequels is Rockstar's word. It is like arguing that Super Mario 64 isn't a sequel to SMB3 because Nintendo didn't put a 4 in front of or that any of the last two Mario's are a sequel because they lack numbers. It is a sequel regardless of how it is named.
They made FIVE GTA games that are on the PS2. FIVE in one generation. It took Nintendo three generations to make 3 Mario games. GTA has too many sequels (games with the same gameplay and a few additions) in too short a time and has come down with a case of Maddenitis.
Post by: ryancoke on December 11, 2007, 08:20:03 AM
