Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Complain about frame rates all you want, but that's graphics engine guff. All of THESE things are choices made to invoke something in the player, and all of these things are art direction.
Just because a game is based in a realistic-esque modern day, doesn't mean that it isn't artistic. A game doesn't need fantasy elements, aliens, monsters, flight, or even bright colors to be artistic. The art direction in the GTA games is in the composition of the world, the modeling of the environment, and the effects they produce on the player. Sega loves those clean, anti-septic neo-tokyo cityscapes for their sonic games, and Activision wants their CoD guns, environs, and dialogue to strike us as authentic. Just like Blizzard's terrain design in their World of WarCraft MMORPG is so amazing because its been painstakingly handcrafted by Blizzard ARTISTS to give each zone its own unique feel, so too has GTA's world been constructed to convey themes and emotions to the player.
I mean... c'mon. Are you now going to tell us that Shenmue is artistically inept, visually bankrupt, and creatively vacuous?
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
So wait poor or inconsistent framerates are in the game to invoke something in the player (Perhaps, what an inept and outdated grahical engine the game uses?). Did they smooth out the framerate a bit? Yes it was but it still was big problem and the games visuals still looked outdated, that includes GTA SA as well, even people who love the game admit that. The reason for the outdated look isn't because of artistic design, but because Rockstar was reusing the same engine over and over again without putting much effort into substantially improving it. Regardles I wonder if anyone read what I said, I didn't say GTA was visually bankrupt (well it started to get to that point during SA) or not creative in other areas, but the graphical style it uses is NOT creative or artistic whatsoever (and I do think you are exagerrating a bit when it comes to that area, separating neighborhoods into different economic classes is not what I call brilliant, but just a way to add diversity to the game to make it seem like a city), fine it may convey emotions but that does not make it an artistic gem, well put together, perhaps, artistic no. If you want my personal opinion I think that anything is basically copying or using a model (such as a painting) is not something to be praised for its brilliant artistic merit, on the other hand abstract artists should be because they are creating something NEW and symbolic. (BTW I don't think Shenmue is an artistically brilliant game either, well designed? Yes. Creative in other areas? Yes. But the visuals aren't what I would call artistic.).
Quote
... What? GTA SA was about ten times bigger than GTA 3, with zero loading times between areas unlike GTA 3. The frame rate was a lot more stable, there were MANY more things happening on screen, pedestrians had AI, they'd chase you down, beat you up, start a conversation with you. The draw distance was pushed back further, there were new weather effects mixed in, to say Rockstar were lazy is absolutely mind boggling. The missions? GTA 3's were all extremely basic, the whole 'fetch this and go deliver it here' type thing. GTA SA had missions that put other games to bloody shame with their depth. But I know NWR and the majority of Nintendo forums have some demented, pointless anger/fear about the series though, because they're successful, fun games that aren't on Nintendo, so I'm not going to get caught up in this mess anymore.
Gee I would hope GTA SA was 10 times bigger than GTA 3 (well take out the overly long country side and it isn't nearly that much) it came out 3 years after it. Heck you even look at the Madden series and a 3 year gap tends to show some significant changes as well. Regardless of what changes SA had in the way of visuals it still was using an aging engine that was created back in 2001, and even fanboys agree it was starting to show its age big time (besides for some odd reason people here). And I do like how people conveniently overlook the fact that it is the NEWER GTA game that people care about when it comes to what will be remembered and replayed, that is lazy design, plain and simple. I'm sorry it is, they just took basically the same game (same engine and all) and expanded on it each year. That is not GTA hate, that is just how it is, and is common sense when you consider each game in the series had around 1 year development time, because that is what you ALWAYS face when you do a yearly edition.
Also I'm not sure where you got I "hate" the game, I'm being realistic and not some blind fanboi that sucks down everything Rockstar gives as "brilliant". The GTA series is a fun series, in fact I own every single game since GTA3, but each game feels more like a glorified expansion pack then something new or unique. When I get GTA4 (which I will) I doubt I'll ever feel like going back to the old ones, unless of course they gimp many of the additions to the series because of the new engine. Hey at least then they can release GTA: Glorified Expansion Pack 1, 2, 3 and still garner praise from all the drooling fans as being the greatest game in history.
To shift the subject a bit here is what I'd like to see improved in the GTA games:
1. Make driver, enemy, and pedestrian AI better. This has been a flaw in most "sandbox" games like GTA
2. Do not sacrifice a smooth (at least 30fps) framerate for purty visuals
3. Don't RUSH THE GAME OUT. Every GTA game on PS2 has a myriad of glitches, they could use much more polish even if it means delaying the game
4. Allow more buildings to be open for exploration
5. Better use of the enviroment. The GTA games are able to provide quality cities and landscapes, but Rockstar seems to have a problem with utilizing alot of that space (Take for example the long drive between cities in SA). Yeah the world may be expansive, but like so many games in the genre most of it feels uninteresting besides select spots.
6. Spread games out for 2 years or more each to be better able to polish the game engine and to make each game a distinct entity so you actually want to go back to an older game because it has an unique soul, instead of an outdated game because the new GTA Pseudo-Expansion pack does more than it.
7. Aiming needs to be improved, it still sucks pretty badly even after all 3 games (another example of an area that Rockstar ignored for the most part)
8. For heaven's sake, PLEASE get rid of the invisible barriers. That is a clear sign of a flaw in the level design when you can't creatively cover up the game's boundary line, and instead run (or swim) into an invisible wall.
Topic: Rockstar has a new game called IV (Read 56637 times)
