*** Grand Theft Auto IV - The Official Thread ***

I find it quite daunting that people expected IV to have as much side content as SA.

Historically, GTA's have always 'matured' from when the debut engined game was released.

If they put everything they could in to IV; 1, It'd be delayed for another year. 2, they'd shoot themselves in the foot because they'll have nothing new planned for the next game which people with enivitably whinge about.
 
Last edited:
2Thumbs said:
I find it quite daunting that people expected IV to have as much side content as SA.

Historically, GTA's have always 'matured' from when the debut engined game was released.

If they put everything they could in to IV; 1, It'd be delayed for another year. 2, they'd shoot themselves in the foot because they'll have nothing new planned for the next game which people with enivitably whinge about.
Click to expand...
I just prefered SA because I liked the setting and the storyline more, I enjoyed the early 90's west-coast Cali setting with the gangsta storyline, and I just prefered the enviroments and map as a whole. The side content in SA was awesome but thats not the reason why I prefer the game, it's for the setting, storyline and soundtrack (radio stations) which I prefer over IV, with SA being my fave GTA game.
 
d3moliti0n said:
I just prefered SA because I liked the setting and the storyline more, I enjoyed the early 90's west-coast Cali setting with the gangsta storyline, and I just prefered the enviroments and map as a whole. The side content in SA was awesome but thats not the reason why I prefer the game, it's for the setting, storyline and soundtrack (radio stations) which I prefer over IV, with SA being my fave GTA game.
Click to expand...

I agree, although it think this GTA is awesome, i still prefer the feel of SA.
 
2Thumbs said:
Historically, GTA's have always 'matured' from when the debut engined game was released.
Click to expand...
Historically - The first, top down GTA's, were all very much of a muchness so I guess you mean GTA III through to SA?

Can hardly be classed as historically being as though it's only happened once! I do know what you mean though as it's a brand new engine so more content will no doubt come with future released, but I can understand why people were expecting more.
 
Joebob said:
Historically - The first, top down GTA's, were all very much of a muchness so I guess you mean GTA III through to SA?
Click to expand...

GTA2 had better graphics, people who could pick pocket you, put who could hijack cars other than you, had more weapons. People talked and shouted with real voices. Probably other things I cant remember too.

Just because they were both top down doesn't mean they were the same game. You wouldn't say the same about III and SA because they use the same engine and are in 3D.
 
I've already sold my GTA4. I completed the story about a week and 3 days after getting it, and didn't play it at all after that. It feels like there's nothing to do after you've done the story. :(

What I liked about SA was that it was actually fun to explore. Exploring is boring in 4 because it's all city - SA had desert, mountains, forests and such. It was a much, much better map.
 
H2F Scott said:
What I liked about SA was that it was actually fun to explore. Exploring is boring in 4 because it's all city - SA had desert, mountains, forests and such. It was a much, much better map.
Click to expand...

I thought SA was a bit of a let down and one of the aspect i didn't like was the hugh map. In vice City i got to know almost all of the town and new exactly where the nearest paint and spray, weapon location or police bribe was but with SA the map were so large you never got a chance to learn them.
 
darn pigeons!

I cant find the last 2 pigeons *sob*

I prefer the orbs on crackdown, you can see them from a distance and get a better sense of which direction they are in from the sound, when you cant see them.
 
2Thumbs said:
GTA2 had better graphics, people who could pick pocket you, put who could hijack cars other than you, had more weapons. People talked and shouted with real voices. Probably other things I cant remember too.

Just because they were both top down doesn't mean they were the same game. You wouldn't say the same about III and SA because they use the same engine and are in 3D.
Click to expand...

hmm, maybe I didn't really give GTA II long enough to really see any differences.

2Thumbs said:
Obviously not old/wise enough to realise...

Quality > quantity.

;)
Click to expand...

yeah but the only people who normally say that are people with 'small man' syndrome :p
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom