Post by: the_zombie_luke on August 11, 2003, 06:56:05 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on August 11, 2003, 07:45:09 PM
But c'mon, GTAIII was a bloody brilliant game. At the time, the graphics were outstanding, the freedom and the land scapes were pretty damn impressive, and it was generally a very fun game to kick back to. GTA will forever be a huge game with the casual gamers, the 'cool' MTV kids, and so on. Which is quite sad, as the majority of them don't even play it for the missions or storyline.
I have such a friend, he owns both GTAIII and Vice City on PS2. Hasn't even come close to finishing them. He just used an Action Reply on both games to unlock the islands, and goes around on rampages.
Post by: Termin8Anakin on August 11, 2003, 09:03:26 PM
Man, it wasn't THAT long ago!
I find PS2 graphics to be overall just blurry messes, and GTAIII/VC delivered greatly. Although you could turn off that blur, the grahics were still sh*thouse.
But yeah, i agree with Monkey how it's 'cool' factor (guns, women, extreme violence, etc) made it popular, and not the true sense of freedom (although this reason was used when parents would ask why their 5 year old kids wanted to buy the game).
Post by: rpglover on August 12, 2003, 01:52:43 AM
you do the same kinds of missions, although they are a bit harder, but mostly the same
i do have to say that the game is fun when you play through the missions, but once they are over, i never could get into free roaming the city
i believe a superior game came out that should have rivaled gta and it was on the computer- mafia
for any one who played that game, the story was great and the game was a lot of fun to play
and the missions all complemented the story perfectly- the graphics were way better and it had a good atmosphere and setting
gta is to me overrated and it got too boring for me- unless the next gta has some major improvements then i may not buy it
Post by: thecubedcanuck on August 12, 2003, 02:09:09 AM
As for the graphics on the PS2. I own all three systems and find the differance in graphics very minimal, and when playing they dont have any effect at all. I dont understand why eveyone makes such a big deal about so little.
Post by: PIAC on August 12, 2003, 02:49:20 AM
ive only played vice city on my pc, and its upgraded its self in my impression (i had only played like 20 minutes of GTA 3 on the PS2 prior) from meh to hey this isn't so bad, there are games i would rather play, but the missions are fun.btw mr canuck, need to fix your avatar buddy, email it to me piac@phw0p.com and ill host it for you if you want
Post by: Mario on August 12, 2003, 03:35:11 AM
Quote
You like WW better than Vice city, good for you, 3 million people thought otherwise.
No offense, but that is one of the most ignorant comments i have ever heard.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 12, 2003, 04:39:54 AM
Post by: thecubedcanuck on August 12, 2003, 04:41:45 AM
how is it ignorant? It is simply a matter of numbers. GTA3 and Vice city both sold in excess of 4 million copies, WW sold 1 million, so it seems 3 million more people prefered GTA.
It only seems ignorant because it goes against YOUR tastes.
Post by: thecubedcanuck on August 12, 2003, 04:44:12 AM
Quote
If Rockstar wants me to buy their next GTA game, it better be something new and original, not the same old game in a new setting.
But thats all WW was? it played exactly like OoT only it had a differant look, yet you think its the best game ever.
Now that is hypocritical, especially based on your very reasons.
Post by: Mario on August 12, 2003, 04:52:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
Mario
how is it ignorant? It is simply a matter of numbers. GTA3 and Vice city both sold in excess of 4 million copies, WW sold 1 million, so it seems 3 million more people prefered GTA.
It only seems ignorant because it goes against YOUR tastes.
Hmmm, so with a console with 10 times the userbase of the GC, Vice City only managed to sell about 4 times as much as Wind Waker? Also, 3 million people did not 'prefer' GTA, they bought it. I have the simpsons road rage and i dont have Wario World, doesnt mean i like the simpsons road rage more than Wario World.
No, it doesnt go against my tastes, i love GTA.
Quote
But thats all WW was? it played exactly like OoT only it had a differant look, yet you think its the best game ever.
Now that is hypocritical, especially based on your very reasons.
TWW did NOT play exactly like OOT, it even had new gameplay mechanics.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 12, 2003, 05:13:37 AM
Post by: Gup on August 12, 2003, 09:54:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill
WW/OoT were completely different. Just because you move around with the control stick and press a button to swing your sword doesn't make their gameplay mechanics the same. On the other hand, for Vice City, new vehicles were added, but was there anything really new to it? No, it looked and felt exactly the same.
Your judgement is pretty unfair. You compared Wind Waker(this gen) to Ocarina of Time(last gen) then GTA 3(this gen) to Vice City(this gen). If you're going to compare like that, shouldn't it be GTA 2(last gen) to Vice City?
Quote
GTA3 was good due to the fact of its originality and how much freedom you had. Vice City, on the other hand, was absolute crap in comparison. The gameplay wasn't improved and bugs filled the game. If Rockstar wants me to buy their next GTA game, it better be something new and original, not the same old game in a new setting.
A lot of companies do that including Nintendo.
Post by: PIAC on August 12, 2003, 10:25:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: thecubedcanuck
It only seems ignorant because it goes against YOUR tastes.
o_O how is that ignorant, HE LOVES GRAND THEFT AUTO 3, how it is 'agained his tastes' are beyond me, it is entirely possible to love both games you know.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 12, 2003, 10:30:25 AM
Post by: Gup on August 12, 2003, 12:01:57 PM
By the way, I'm not trying to defend GTA, I just don't like people bashing a series for no reasons.
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 12, 2003, 12:28:34 PM
Post by: Gup on August 12, 2003, 12:35:22 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on August 12, 2003, 01:20:09 PM
Post by: Dirk Temporo on August 12, 2003, 03:24:10 PM
On topic: PC GTAIII/VC 0wnZ j00. It's so much better with mouse aiming and you can get a higher framerate and better graphics, depending on your system. I liked it much better than the PS2 version and personally don't care if it ever goes to another system. As long as it keeps coming on PC, I'm happy.
Post by: ThePerm on August 12, 2003, 05:22:51 PM
Post by: egman on August 13, 2003, 05:51:05 AM
While the games certainly has an extensive amount of freedom it's still rather restrictive, even by today's standards. Games like Morrowind have much greater freedom and levels of interactivity, but you don't see the media hyping those games up. GTA's gameplay is only a small part of it's success; I think timing has played a larger role.
The first two GTA's were relatively ignored, in spite of some small acclaim and kind of cult following that developed around them. GTA 3 exploded because it came at the time when the Playstation brand had undoubtly become the face of gaming. On top of that, GTA 3 tapped into what was hip. A renewed interest in the mob and the underworld fueled by the success of the Sorpranos certainly played a part in the GTA hype train.
The game has it's good points, so I won't get into an argument about taste because we're all individuals in our gaming habits. However, I really think it would not have done any better than its previous incarnations if it was not for the fact that it just came at the right time. Calling it some kind of cultural event or the pinacle of gaming is a big leap I think, especially when you take in account how GTA 3/Vice City are essentially the original GTA's in 3d. I fail to see any revolution except for the fact that it's success pretty much demonstrates that gaming is no longer a niche.
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 13, 2003, 02:45:13 PM
I agree with TheCubedCanuck (that's happening far too often lately
)- while OoT, MM, and WW are some of my favorite games ever (1st, 2nd, and 4th, actually, with LttP being 3rd), there was barely any additions gameplay between them. It's okay to come down on Vice City for basically being GTA3 with motorcycles (which it WAS), but realize that that in no way promotes Nintendo.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on August 13, 2003, 05:31:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
I'm HOPING this thing won't turn into a GTA bashing thread. I can understand if you honestly don't like the game, but a lot of people "don't like it" simply because it's a huge game that's NOT on the Gamecube, and they resent that. I personally love the game- GTA3 and Vice City are just plain some of the funnest games around in my opinion. The level of freedom is simply unmatched. I love that, and so does Miyamoto- he said he really admires how much freedom the game offers and is trying to incorporate that into his games.
I didn't start this topic to bash GTA. I bought Vice City with excitement, but while it's a solid game, I personally feel that people over hype GTA 3/VC. Some are saying the level of freedom isn't in other games. Well, I disagree. Deus Ex, for example, on the PC and PS2, lets you choose exactly how to play and be. You can be an expert hacker or you can be an expert killing machine. Furthermore, in the game you can stalk from the shadows, kill everything, or hack a turret and dispose of your foes that way. I am really unsure of how GTA allows "complete freedom." It does let you kill anyone, steal any car, and go just about anywhere. Maybe Ocarina of Time didn't allow that but you didn't have to figure out the dungeons right away. I bet everyone here rode through Hyrule Field aimlessly or just went down to the lake to fish. That's freedom. Animal Crossing is another such game. You can fish, not pay off your debt,or just play NES all day. Anyone who has played Morrowind or Baldur's Gate will tell you that those games let you do just about anything as well.
Finally, I'm sure there are those who slander GTA because it's not on GameCube. Admittedly, I did criticize GTA before I played it. The same goes for Halo. Fortunately, I have a good PC and I can play them both(Halo is coming!). Now I can review GTA fairly, and let's just say it's not revolutionary but not a waste of money. What bothers me most about GTA is the fans that endlessly hype it. The same is true for X-Box and GameCube fans as well, and it's sad to see GTA or Halo or Smash Bros Melee overshadow Ico or Shemue 2 or Eternal Darkness.
Post by: PIAC on August 14, 2003, 01:06:39 AM
Post by: JB on August 14, 2003, 05:11:08 AM
You can't go comparing two games based on sales figures. Sales figures only show how well a game sells, not how people like it or how good a game is. That Tellytubbies song for example sold a lot better than many songs from talented artists. It doesn't mean that everyone that bought the CD prefers the musical talent of the Tellytubbies to that of Linkin Park(the first name that popped into my head).
Post by: egman on August 14, 2003, 05:56:28 AM
I'm also not implying that Nintendo is always innovative. Indeed much of their work these days and even the past has been more refinement rather than something new. Games like Wario Ware, Animal Crossing, and Pikmin are a step in the right direction, but Nintendo has not gone as far as they implied they would. They are hurting themselves in that sense.
But I'm still of the opinion that GTA success was more the result of timing more than anything else. If GTA was such revolutionary experince, then where the hell was everyone when Rockstar made roughly the same game two prequels ago?
Post by: Grey Ninja on August 14, 2003, 06:10:40 AM
I don't feel like going further into detail, and I need to get some sleep.
Post by: mouse_clicker on August 14, 2003, 07:47:07 AM
Quote
But I'm still of the opinion that GTA success was more the result of timing more than anything else. If GTA was such revolutionary experince, then where the hell was everyone when Rockstar made roughly the same game two prequels ago?
They weren't 3D- even the people who hate GTA3 have to admit that it's funner in 3D than with that goofy bird's eye view from GTA1 and GTA2. When working with something like a full blown city, actually being able to SEE the buildings and recognize them AS buildings makes a world of difference.
Quote
Also, the AI is outdated. Cops will not follow you up high buildings and even the SWAT team isn't intelligent and the only way the cops and SWAT's can stop you is with sheer numbers.
The AI is FUN. If the cops in Liberty and Vice City acted the way *real* cops do, it wouldn't be fun at all (or even less fun for you). Real police chases involve the cops following very far behind so as not to endanger any bystanders, and there's hardly ever a shoot out. Real cops wouldn't send tanks and helicopters after 1 criminal. Real cops are a lot smarter and would bust you when you were least expecting it. THAT'S no fun. The AI in GTA3 and Vice City are such that they give you the greatest challenge of escaping while still having immense fun.
Quote
I think the high point of the game is the soundtrack. But even then, old 80's music can't stand up to the glorious orchestrated music of Smash Bros and Metroid Prime's catchy score.
Why are you even comparing the two? SSBM and Metroid Prime are two very different games even between themselves, much less with GTA thrown into the mix. Just because you don't happen to like old 80's music that much (listen to GTA3 if you want more modern stuff) doesn't mean SSBM and MP's music are any better. Plus, have you ever listened to the talk radio in either GTA game? Some of the funniest stuff in a videogame ever, if you ask me.
As much as you guys may try to stop it, all this thread is a GTA bash- that's ALL it is. There's absolutely no point for it. It'd be like me going to an XBox board and saying Zelda is overhyped and nowhere near as good as anything on the XBox (Blinx's music is SO much better). Come one, people.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on August 14, 2003, 08:43:28 AM
[
Quote
Why are you even comparing the two? SSBM and Metroid Prime are two very different games even between themselves, much less with GTA thrown into the mix. Just because you don't happen to like old 80's music that much (listen to GTA3 if you want more modern stuff) doesn't mean SSBM and MP's music are any better. Plus, have you ever listened to the talk radio in either GTA game? Some of the funniest stuff in a videogame ever, if you ask me.
As much as you guys may try to stop it, all this thread is a GTA bash- that's ALL it is. There's absolutely no point for it. It'd be like me going to an XBox board and saying Zelda is overhyped and nowhere near as good as anything on the XBox (Blinx's music is SO much better). Come one, people.
I have several 80's CD's and I actually do like the soundtrack. Vice City also allows users on the PC to drop MP3's into a folder and make their own station. But the point of the matter is Vice City is just licensed music and while it's a good soundtrack, I would rather have orchestrated music. It's just a personal opinion.
You keep saying this thread is about bashing GTA, but you keep ignoring the fact that we have legitimate criticisms about the game but most of us posted that we still enjoy the game. Just because I dislike certain parts of the game doesn't mean I hate the game. I just wish reviewers would address GTA's problems. No reviewer ever said how glitchy GTA III and Vice City were. That should tell you something right there. I even have problems with Eternal Darkness and Wind Waker. It doesn't mean I'm out to bash them. You're correct that most of these threads turn into blind bashing sessions, but I have not see anyone post something that was not legitimate and sincere. This thread is much better than the "Nintendo is kiddy" threads or the threads where players bash games they have not played on various sites. We may have certain problems about GTA, but we still play it and enjoy it.
Post by: PIAC on August 14, 2003, 10:28:10 AM
Quote
Quote
But I'm still of the opinion that GTA success was more the result of timing more than anything else. If GTA was such revolutionary experince, then where the hell was everyone when Rockstar made roughly the same game two prequels ago?
They weren't 3D- even the people who hate GTA3 have to admit that it's funner in 3D than with that goofy bird's eye view from GTA1 and GTA2. When working with something like a full blown city, actually being able to SEE the buildings and recognize them AS buildings makes a world of difference.
too be totally honest, i prefer gta 1 and 2 to gta 3
the 2d is alot of fun, and i would have prefered if gta3 was in 2d
Post by: KnowsNothing on August 14, 2003, 12:35:00 PM
Post by: rpglover on August 14, 2003, 02:21:18 PM
i own a ps2 and i dont think that the gta series on it really are the games to own on that console
there are better games out there than just gta- deus ex does give you more freedom in a game
but gta isnt supposed to be the greatest technical marvel or game, but the game is fun for a time at least
although the game is fun to finish the missions and do mass killings from time to time, it gets old to me after the missions are over- once they are done, the game doesnt really feel as fun as you dont have a point to play the game
personally once you get a hooker, run over people, and do mass killings to get the stars up as high as can be, then basically you have seen the game and what people like- it just gets too old to me
this probably sounds odd coming from a person who loves ikaruga to death, but that is just my feeling
