[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (DaWiesel @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 14:10)

Seriously, IV's LC beats III's LC anytime. IV's LC is simply better because of the detail R* has put in GTA IV. It's what I call a living city, for it's time atleast. It's also my favourite GTA city, but will probably be beaten by V's LS.

I read every1's post but decided to quote this one. I just woke up to see these posts...and Ill admit I have some problems with letting go of the past. Especially if it didnt need to be changed. I saw the Liberty City Stories comment. And I gotta say it was throw away game SERIOUSLY. San Andreas engine with GTA III environment. Some of u would say to me "go play that one and shut ur trap" But I did - And found out different R* branches took care of that one....which really makes a difference. And WTF is the point of refurbishing the old LC in LCS....and then trashing it and making IV??? They could have just made a new area in a new state. What happened to Developers surgically removing and adding things to older games? Sorta like what Gears of War 3 does every multiplayer update. They constantly change the game modes...but the basis remains the same.

[DaWiesel]

The LC in III has nothing to do with the LC in IV. They are like different places. I also don't understand why IV's LC is trash. Compare the Times Square in GTA III with the one in IV, IV wins absolutely. Maybe it's nostalgia?

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (Official General @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 11:36)

QUOTE (JurzeeDee @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 02:52) U cant tell me u wanna go hop on GTA IV right now because thats a bullsh*t lie. But im still playin GTA VC. ON PS2!! @ JurzeeDee Oh really ?? And you know what goes on in my head do you ?? Well let me correct you. I play GTA IV and the Episodes all the time when I wanna play GTA, its the only GTA game I'm actually playing right now. Believe it or not Vice City is my favourite GTA of the all, but I just can't play it again because the graphics and physics would look and feel very outdated to me, and I'm too used to the newer advanced technical features of GTA IV. So no, it is not a lie I do hop on my PS3 and play GTA IV quite a lot. There is nothing wrong with GTA IV's Liberty City, for me it was near-perfect - I just wish that there had been more fun and interesting things to do and see in the place, in addition to what was in the game already. @ Carbine23 Ok you are from New York City, but I have been to New York City many times myself, so I can still have a small right to say that my views on this subject hold some validity. To me, Liberty City in GTA IV looked very much like NYC in many areas. Like Miami said, Rockstar never intended to re-create NYC block for block in its exact, real-life size. But I will say though, what I did not like about IV's LC was that Manhattan (Algonquin) was bigger than Brooklyn (Broker) and Queens (Dukes), because in real life Manhattan is very much smaller than the two. I wished Broker and Dukes were much bigger places, there could have been so much more Rockstar could have put into them. They should have also put in a sports stadium too.

III has a stadium there u go with the reminiscence of old. U wont escape the past. Only hope to prolong its hiding.

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (DaWiesel @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 15:33)

The LC in III has nothing to do with the LC in IV. They are like different places. I also don't understand why IV's LC is trash. Compare the Times Square in GTA III with the one in IV, IV wins absolutely. Maybe it's nostalgia?

Maybe its a different core system. With better graphics cards. U seem to think i dont liek the visuals or think GTA III is better. I dont like Rockstar Ideals. I know one thing for sure...Im not one that follows games for graphics or engineering like u. Is that really the only way u can argue my claim? Nothing about it having better gameplay or characters or nothing. Cuz (GTA IV) is just a big open city u where u can skydive off buildings and play online. U can do way more in San Andreas. Idk who the f*ck u guys think ur kidding...Who raves about this franchise anymore?? NO1. Ever since Saints Row came out....its like rockstar had their balls between their legs trying to compete with Saints (in terms of size of map and visuals) They wont thrive on visuals alone ill tell u that...lets see them dig themselves out with GTA V.

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (Magic_Al @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 02:34)

Remember GTA III followed GTA2 which had "Anywhere City". The attitude was more toward it being a generic fantasy city.  It didn't matter if the city was full of stuff that didn't belong in New York at all.  In GTA IV that did matter because it was trying to be more specific like GTA SA and VC.

It explains it pretty well right here. - But I f*cking LOVED that about III.

This post has been edited by JurzeeDee on Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 15:59

[DaWiesel]

Calm down, man. You are talking for you, not for every one. And I didn't say I just care about graphics. GTA IV has a better gameplay and much better characters than GTA III. Some of the sidemissios exist in both games like car deliverings and vigilante missions and more...

...but wasn't your point the city? Liberty City? Or did you just find GTA IV boring and sh*t? That's what it looks like. Just another GTA IV bashing thread from another III era fanboy.

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (DaWiesel @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 17:32)

Calm down, man. You are talking for you, not for every one. And I didn't say I just care about graphics. GTA IV has a better gameplay and much better characters than GTA III. Some of the sidemissios exist in both games like car deliverings and vigilante missions and more... ...but wasn't your point the city? Liberty City? Or did you just find GTA IV boring and sh*t? That's what it looks like. Just another GTA IV bashing thread from another III era fanboy.

Let me clarify this for u. I believe GTA III is a more enjoyable game. There are factors that go along with WHY i believe that. One of them is WHEN it was released. I believe it was ahead of its time. >> (off topic) I Also believe TBofGT was better than the Original story for GTA IV. As u can probably imagine Im all for bringing back old ideas that work and are thriving...but to make the fans wait all that time...and they introduce the same sorta "cant afford to lose" type immigrant story. TBofGT wasa more fitting Expansion and I think Luis would have been a better Pro. I also think San Andreas is the only one that features a "local" protagonist to the plot. >>(back to topic) I honor and appreciate GTA III - VC - SA - IV for what they were and still are. And if I happen to find GTA IV a little more boring than the others so what? Its a GTA IV thread I can shed it in any light I damn well please. U say im the fanboy what are u? A hypocrite? Uve been on this forum longer than I have. This is my first account but somehow imma bigger fanboy than u smh. U come out with zero fact only arbitrary opinions. "Much better characters than GTA III" How? In What way? Why? Because its newer? Because the graphics are better? I stated that I dont agree with R* decision to recreate GTA IV and ur trying to sit here and convince me that its better than GTA III all because I said they shoulda kept the land scape. Have u even played GTA III in the last decade? What the f*ck facts are u exactly going on....because Ive played both GTA III and IV within the last hour.

[DaWiesel]

So, I'm the hipocrite and I'm the one wanting to convince someone? Do you have a problem, just because I like GTA IV more than GTA III? I was expressing my opinion, I prefer the gameplay and the characters in GTA IV over the ones in III. You are making stupid accusions and you are trying to convince us that GTA IV is sh*t. That's why I called you fanboy, because that's how III era and especially SA fanboys think. They can't accept people liking GTA IV more over past GTA games.

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (DaWiesel @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 21:49)

So, I'm the hipocrite and I'm the one wanting to convince someone? Do you have a problem, just because I like GTA IV more than GTA III? I was expressing my opinion, I prefer the gameplay and the characters in GTA IV over the ones in III. You are making stupid accusions and you are trying to convince us that GTA IV is sh*t. That's why I called you fanboy, because that's how III era and especially SA fanboys think. They can't accept people liking GTA IV more over past GTA games.

Shouldnt call anyone a fanboy. U lose respect when u start insinuating ppl are fanboys. No one wants to be put into an inferior position. Ur just as guilty of the accusations so I will end it here. I am sorry if I made u feel inferior with my accusations. They are not meant to make u feel a certain way at all. I simply shed light on any/every aspect of a debate. I feel its essential if we we are to defend each others view of these games. I just hope (after all this) that u do understand u are just as much a fanboy of GTA IV as we are with our games.

[DaWiesel]

Maybe I overreacted, i'm sorry for that but I don't find GTA IV perfect. It's my favourite and SA is the close number 2. Tuning and more interiors (an example are the ones you can look into the building but you can't enter it) are two things that should be in GTA IV. I'm also not a GTA IV fanboy, more a GTA fanboy.

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (DaWiesel @ Wednesday, Jun 6 2012, 22:47)

Maybe I overreacted, i'm sorry for that but I don't find GTA IV perfect. It's my favourite and SA is the close number 2. Tuning and more interiors (an example are the ones you can look into the building but you can't enter it) are two things that should be in GTA IV. I'm also not a GTA IV fanboy, more a GTA fanboy.

Indeed. I lose my feet too sometimes over all the things R* COULD HAVE included in every game. Well really ANY franchise. I.E. Epic Games. Ughhh. But what can we do but hope that they recognize our wants and likings. I know sometimes a Developer can listen to fans a bit TOO much and f*ck a game up haha. I think alot of why I hold onto GTA III is def (like u said) Nostalgia. I look at it more as a mistake on R*'s part. Like it was a pregnancy that turned out to be a beauty. As if they didnt realise what they had stumbled upon. I get the same impression from Gears of War 1 Multiplayer lol

[ludi911]

I understand Rockstar choice to remake LC but they could leave old districts names and add a few references to the history of Claude and Toni (small ones for fans of the series)
Anyway IV is a great game and 08 LC is a great living city .
peace

[Miamivicecity]

I have to be honest everytime I play GTA III nowdays I usually get bored of it after 10 minutes. It was a great game in 2001/2002 and still is, but it's aged pretty bad IMO.

Don't worry I even feel the same way about VC. Though it's aged a bit better. SA as great as it is bores me too after a while.

What I like about GTA IV and since this thread is about the city itself is it feels like a real city. Just the other day I noticed a drug dealer dealing drugs with a random ped. I've had this game on PS3 and now 360 and I've never seen that before.

That's why this game is so awesome to me. Even just walking around the city I stumble across something new. It really makes the GTA III era cities feel dead and dull. That's saying something since I grew up with the old games so I definitely don't have a bias towards GTA IV being a new fan to the series.


This post has been edited by Miamivicecity on Thursday, Jun 7 2012, 03:35

[lzw3]

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Thursday, Jun 7 2012, 13:19)

I have to be honest everytime I play GTA III nowdays I usually get bored of it after 10 minutes. It was a great game in 2001/2002 and still is, but it's aged pretty bad IMO.

I second that, whereas GTA IV has been out for 4 years and still isn't losing its touch, and there's always something to do or somewhere to explore. GTA III is pretty boring, I could probably 100% it in a day, and there's basically nothing to do in it except stunt jumps and shooting Columbians.

San Andreas, on the other hand, also IMO has aged very well. Due to its enormous map, there (like IV) is always somewhere to explore or something to complete, whether it be oysters, stunts, just looking around or even cruising.

This discussion is getting pretty heated.

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (lzw3 @ Thursday, Jun 7 2012, 16:56)

I second that, whereas GTA IV has been out for 4 years and still isn't losing its touch, and there's always something to do or somewhere to explore. GTA III is pretty boring, I could probably 100% it in a day, and there's basically nothing to do in it except stunt jumps and shooting Columbians.

I think the last time I completed GTA III was sometime in 2002. Every so often I'll fire up a new save, but after a few minutes I just find it so boring. I understand how people like its atmosphere and all, but it's not for me.

GTA IV trumps it IMO.

[Official General]

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Thursday, Jun 7 2012, 03:19)

I have to be honest everytime I play GTA III nowdays I usually get bored of it after 10 minutes. It was a great game in 2001/2002 and still is, but it's aged pretty bad IMO. Don't worry I even feel the same way about VC. Though it's aged a bit better. SA as great as it is bores me too after a while. What I like about GTA IV and since this thread is about the city itself is it feels like a real city. Just the other day I noticed a drug dealer dealing drugs with a random ped. I've had this game on PS3 and now 360 and I've never seen that before. That's why this game is so awesome to me. Even just walking around the city I stumble across something new. It really makes the GTA III era cities feel dead and dull. That's saying something since I grew up with the old games so I definitely don't have a bias towards GTA IV being a new fan to the series.

The one experience that made GTA IV much better for me was once I discovered how to create and ignite explosive gunfights and shoot-outs between rival gangs that did not involve me or the police. You should try that, that sh*t is crazy, everywhere gets shot up and so many innocent people get hit ! After doing all this I began to like IV a bit more.

[spaceeinstein]

And no mention of the ORIGINAL Liberty City at all... Or other renditions on the portables for that matter. Bias much?

QUOTE

its like rockstar had their balls between their legs trying to compete with Saints (in terms of size of map and visuals)

SR wasn't as critically acclaimed or sold as much as GTA IV. Clearly R* has a winning strategy and you are being nonsensical.

This post has been edited by spaceeinstein on Friday, Jun 8 2012, 05:25

[ClassicLugeMick]

Honestly, GTA IV and GTA III are completely different beasts. With the graphics limits and such in the original GTA III, I absolutely loved it in the day. Amazing game as a Sophomore in high school. When GTA IV came out, it was just as amazing in its own sense. Now if I had to choose which layout I enjoy better? It would have to be GTA IV Liberty City. It just seems much more realistic to me, with the larger skyscrapers and such.

[JurzeeDee]

I understand GTA IV is more advanced in its city and its realism. I get that part. A smidgen of it was the "Layout" (Reasoning for this thread) But what I love about GTA III environment is the ATMOSPHERE. That could be the Music....parodies...billboards ect. Constantly I hear how GTA IV has advanced the whole 9....it has more "realism". And I can relate to those of u who remain jaded by the visuals. Its much deeper than visuals tho like I continue to say. And I saw someone mention that "Much like SA - GTA IV seems like it has endless missions" Or whatever I saw there. Im not going back and checking....but anyway...yea...doing the same mission for 25 different variations is not that fun either. Talk about boring? What is so hard about u guys accepting the fact that R* was dick hard about their environment. And everything else was secondary to them. Los Santos will be their redemption. Their like every other Label....once they go mainstream they hire "fans" to run their sh*t for em. And the fans ruin it with their dumbass ideas about "growth" HAHA that last line was a bit arbitrary...but u get where im going.

[JurzeeDee]

QUOTE (ludi911 @ Thursday, Jun 7 2012, 00:05)

I understand Rockstar choice to remake LC but they could leave old districts names and add a few references to the history of Claude and Toni (small ones for fans of the series) Anyway IV is a great game and 08 LC is a great living city . peace

Indeed sir. I think the Realism for GTA IV was incredible. IMO just not as enjoyable and in tune with itself.