[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (BabeRuth @ Wednesday, Aug 15 2012, 09:29)

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Monday, Aug 13 2012, 02:22) QUOTE (BabeRuth @ Monday, Aug 13 2012, 01:59) QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Sunday, Aug 12 2012, 07:32) QUOTE (BabeRuth @ Sunday, Aug 12 2012, 18:20) IV is the most Overrated GTA ever in my opinion. How can something so graceful which excels in brilliance and excellence be overrated? People always bring up the realism/graphics how it was so great. People talk how Niko is the greatest protagonist ever. And if you click on the GTA Series it has over 1Mil. of replies, almost 3x the amout of SA. I'm not really sure how it's any different to people who think CJ is the best protagonist ever and then they bring up all the features. Basically it's all very, very subjective. There's no point getting upset or taking it personally. If people want to think of GTA IV like that I don't see why they can't. Just as people can think of SA being the recarnation of god himself even though I don't agree. No one's right or wrong. I do like SA, but GTA IV really is a better game and I'll always maintain that opinion for aslong I as I'm a GTA fan for. Good point. We all have our own opinions, but the thing i don't like is that you keep on dogging CJ and that annoys me

Don't take it so seriously. CJ isn't a bad character. It's just fun debating with you.

[BabeRuth]

We are good at butting heads .

By the way....Did you check out the "which game got boring faster" .

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (BabeRuth @ Wednesday, Aug 15 2012, 10:43)

We are good at butting heads . By the way....Did you check out the "which game got boring faster" .

Hahaha good one, but VC still has less votes than SA.

[BabeRuth]

Touchè.

[Druffmaul]

Yes by far its the worst of the GTA series

It's overstating the case, but that's my vote.

I liked San Andreas a lot the first time I played through it. Honest I did. The breakdown occurs when I try to replay it. I've replayed GTA III and VC and IV tons of times, beginning to end. I just can't do it with SA. I've tried a few times, I always seem to get about halfway through the San Fierro missions and then just run out of gas. It's too big for me. It stops being fun and becomes a ponderous chore. I couldn't give less of a f*ck about "all the cool fun things you can do" in it. Honestly puzzles me why people love it so damn much. It reminds me of when GTA III came out, and everyone was going on and on about how it's "way more fun to use codes to unlock weapons and just f*ck sh*t up than to do the stupid missions." I felt the completely opposite was true and I still do. I've always felt somewhat out of step with the majority of GTA fans.

SA is a technical marvel and it's literally awesome that they were able to create a game that size and that scale. But goddammit, it just isn't very fun to me. I prefer the tighter focus of the other GTAs.

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (Druffmaul @ Friday, Aug 17 2012, 11:53)

Yes by far its the worst of the GTA series It's overstating the case, but that's my vote. I liked San Andreas a lot the first time I played through it. Honest I did. The breakdown occurs when I try to replay it. I've replayed GTA III and VC and IV tons of times, beginning to end. I just can't do it with SA. I've tried a few times, I always seem to get about halfway through the San Fierro missions and then just run out of gas. It's too big for me. It stops being fun and becomes a ponderous chore. I couldn't give less of a f*ck about "all the cool fun things you can do" in it. Honestly puzzles me why people love it so damn much. It reminds me of when GTA III came out, and everyone was going on and on about how it's "way more fun to use codes to unlock weapons and just f*ck sh*t up than to do the stupid missions." I felt the completely opposite was true and I still do. I've always felt somewhat out of step with the majority of GTA fans. SA is a technical marvel and it's literally awesome that they were able to create a game that size and that scale. But goddammit, it just isn't very fun to me. I prefer the tighter focus of the other GTAs.

It's not SA is a terrible game, but those pretty much mirror my thoughts also.

[loki18760]

Personally I find SA to be one of the best games of the Franchise. It was geared to a younger audience and that's were some fans might have seen a problem with the "gangster" theme.

The story line was lack luster in parts, and out there in others, but it was action packed, and again geared to a younger audience. Personally I find the Mafia missions in GTA's to be the worst. They are always repetitive and seem recycled.

Niko- my least favorite character, he treated Roman like crap. Every mission was about a dollar. I look at Niko and see Claude with a voice box. Mindless thoughtless killer. He calls friend up on his cell phone but I don't feel like he connect to a single other character in the game But Dwayne

CJ- one of my favorite characters in the Franchise, his love for his family and Friends are his driving factor. First to clean up the hood he live in. Later to create a good life for him and his sister in SF and again when Sweet knocks him back down to earth. His family come first and i think that's a redeeming quality that allows me to connect to him.

As for Mechanics SA had it down there isn't any denying that. Everything you did in that game seemed to run well. At least for me except the popup trees of doom.

I think for the console and Limitation that it had been given I think SA excelled beyond anyone's expectation for a console game at the time. The map while not well utilized was a awesome step in the right direction. I didn't find it too big at all, by time u discovered the whole map you had a plane and pilots license and could steal a plane from any airport if you needed to travel long distances. and driving through the country side proved to be something i looked forward too.

That being said if someone ask me what grand theft auto they should PLay I would have to go with TBOGT. It has the crazy storyline the action and enough flare to keep most SA fans content... for now.

Is SA overrated, maybe a little. Will i side with people who praise GTA 4 no. I think many people would agree that a couple of "stories" shouldn't have been created and that time should have been spent on Making GTA 4 the game it should have been.

For me it's TBOGT from now till GTA 5 comes out.

This post has been edited by loki18760 on Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 04:58

[Miamivicecity]

In what way does Niko treat Roman like crap? Everytime Roman finds himself in a hole Niko is there to dig him out. Then of course there's the fact Roman lies to him yet Niko still bends over backwards for him.

I mean sure everyone has their opinion, but you could explain why. Niko has to be the most down to earth and "real" GTA protagonist ever made.

He feels like a real person with real emotions, Definitely not Claude with a voicebox.

This post has been edited by Miamivicecity on Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 06:02

[ZoomZoom]

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 05:51)

In what way does Niko treat Roman like crap? Everytime Roman finds himself in a hole Niko is there to dig him out. Then of course there's the fact Roman lies to him yet Niko still bends over backwards for him. I mean sure everyone has their opinion, but you could explain why. Niko has to be the most down to earth and "real" GTA protagonist ever made. He feels like a real person with real emotions, Definitely not Claude with a voicebox.

In the first place Niko never treated Roman like crap. Niko always helped him.

Niko was the "real" GTA protagonist because he was badass, no mercy and .....well... he was set in the new era which is advanced and realistic...

Actually, people say Niko as Claude with a voice-box because Claude too like Niko was badass...But IMO Niko is not actually a Claude with a voice-box if he is then its a good voice-box he got!!!

[MyDog]

Both of them probably had a traumatic experience that made them cold blooded and indifferent to human life. In Niko's case it is the war.

[loki18760]

In any of the case with Niko Did you actually say f*ck it this dude is cool and not "badass."

All GTA characters are badasses. I have to ask you is that the only reason you like him.

"In what way does Niko treat Roman like crap?"

9/10 Times that you do a mission with Roman Niko is complaining about him and telling him to shut up. every other mission it is about money. Hell the main mission that starts the game off Is Niko shooting a guy in the head with no concern at all for how it is going to effect Roman. Roman's a douche bag, but he comes from a douche bag family. Roman keep's secrets and lies (lies about his shortcoming and addictions)... um Niko keep secrets the whole game, and thats annoying when your suppose to be playing the game from his perspective.

He never once came off as anything other than a mindless robot, you can ask other people it's what they find annoying about Niko. His back story seems pathetically thin, People in GTA feel like nothing more than contacts because of Niko mentality of it's all about the money. It feels like the revenge was only put in as a afterthought something to fill it out more.

The choices in the game don't even feel like choices, if you go by how Niko makes you feel, you kill everyone. I don't like the it's because he's went to war mentality. War isn't an excuse to be a robot. Even when the girl dies at the end Niko still seems heartless. Dimitri feels less heartless in my opion and he has his friend killed

NIKO=CLAUDE with a voice box, because of his heartlessness, his apparent lack of values and virtually none existent background. And the inability of him to connect to other people in game to allow for a more enjoyable experiences. Because he is a badass? nah Tommy was a badass, Niko is just a dude with an attitude problem.

I think people get blinded by the Graphics and relative newness of GTA 4 and fail to see it's short comings when coming to the GTA universe.

I'm a GTA fan have been since the beginning. GTA 4 DLC had more relatable characters, Luis and Johnny recovered what would have been a disappointment of a map.

ON TOPIC: GTA SA was more for filling to alot of people you start with something and end with everything. GTA4 you start with nothing and you feel like you end with nothing.

[ShenLong Kazama]

Nope, GTA SA stood up to it's hype, not like GTA IV which was a huge disappointment. However, with mods it makes fun but without, nah

[MyDog]

QUOTE (loki18760 @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 15:11)

In any of the case with Niko Did you actually say f*ck it this dude is cool and not "badass." All GTA characters are badasses. I have to ask you is that the only reason you like him. "In what way does Niko treat Roman like crap?" 9/10 Times that you do a mission with Roman Niko is complaining about him and telling him to shut up. every other mission it is about money. Hell the main mission that starts the game off Is Niko shooting a guy in the head with no concern at all for how it is going to effect Roman. Roman's a douche bag, but he comes from a douche bag family. Roman keep's secrets and lies (lies about his shortcoming and addictions)... um Niko keep secrets the whole game, and thats annoying when your suppose to be playing the game from his perspective. He never once came off as anything other than a mindless robot, you can ask other people it's what they find annoying about Niko. His back story seems pathetically thin, People in GTA feel like nothing more than contacts because of Niko mentality of it's all about the money. It feels like the revenge was only put in as a afterthought something to fill it out more. The choices in the game don't even feel like choices, if you go by how Niko makes you feel, you kill everyone. I don't like the it's because he's went to war mentality. War isn't an excuse to be a robot. Even when the girl dies at the end Niko still seems heartless. Dimitri feels less heartless in my opion and he has his friend killed NIKO=CLAUDE with a voice box, because of his heartlessness, his apparent lack of values and virtually none existent background. And the inability of him to connect to other people in game to allow for a more enjoyable experiences. Because he is a badass? nah Tommy was a badass, Niko is just a dude with an attitude problem. I think people get blinded by the Graphics and relative newness of GTA 4 and fail to see it's short comings when coming to the GTA universe. I'm a GTA fan have been since the beginning. GTA 4 DLC had more relatable characters, Luis and Johnny recovered what would have been a disappointment of a map. ON TOPIC: GTA SA was more for filling to alot of people you start with something and end with everything. GTA4 you start with nothing and you feel like you end with nothing.

1. And what should it be about? Peanuts?

2. His backstory is thin? How is it thinner than any other protagonist's backstory?

3. Of course it's all about the money! Niko is a contract killer. Do contract killers, when they take jobs, care about anything other than money? No.

4. How does he feel heartless? What did you expect him to do, pour his eyes out crying? It isn't true that he's a heartless murderer, for example when you kill Dardan, he exclaims something like "I promised myself I wouldn't kill people in this city!" and if you kill Darko, Niko says that he feels empty. Plus Dimitri didn't willfully order Faustin's death, he was forced to.

5. Claude does have a non-existent background, but Niko doesn't. We know that he's from a village in Serbia. We know his mother's name. The reasons for Niko's arrival to Liberty are very well explained. In the case of Claude, we don't even know the guy's nationality.

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (loki18760 @ Monday, Aug 20 2012, 02:11)

I think people get blinded by the Graphics and relative newness of GTA 4 and fail to see it's short comings when coming to the GTA universe.

Well I can say the same thing about people blinded by the GTA III era. Keep in mind aswell I didn't start out with GTA IV so I haven't developed a false perception based on graphics and newness.

I've experienced every GTA pre-GTA IV when they were fresh and new, but I still prefer GTA IV. Why? I just do.

I'm still a VC fan at heart, but GTA IV gets treated like an outcast even though it's not as bad as people say it is. I mean sure it has its shortcomings, but they all do.



This post has been edited by Miamivicecity on Monday, Aug 20 2012, 02:29

[loki18760]

I am mearly stating my opinion on this topic which is what this forum is about. I think people are too quick to say that GTA 4 is better.

@Miamivicecity

My opinion wasn't completely dirrected at you, but for GTA-4 fanboys.

I think people bash on it because it should have been a better game. At the time it had everything going for it and rave reviews, but alot of people realized that GTA element of it was a little fleeting when compared to other tittles such as SA or VC. Looking at GTA 4 it looks like a set back in the genre. To me and many of my friends. I know it should be compared to GTA3 as a better comparison. But it was the next generation of GTA and it left something to be desired for fans that are a little younger to the series. (I played GTA 1 when it came out, and every one since)

@mydog

No not peanuts but it should feel like you accomplish something when you complete a game, vice city and san andreas you felt that. GTA3-4 you didn't feel a dam thing but a completed game. Beating GTA 4 for me meant thank god i can start on the DLC

"His backstory is thin? How is it thinner than any other protagonist's backstory?" Because it is, GTA SA since that is what this topic is about. YOu learned about his chiildhood about his childhood friends About his mother, his dead brother, Sweet, smoke rider, they all have a place in his history and you learn that through the story of the game. Niko you learn "We know that he's from a village in Serbia. We know his mother's name. The reasons for Niko's arrival to Liberty " and that he was in a war and he is cousins with Roman.

"How does he feel heartless?

I exspect more emotion than a few words, of him bitching that he got his hands dirty, it wasn't about the death and wasn't even worried about his safety. No no tears, but what are surpose to the emotional moments in game were last luster when compared to the royal curse out that CJ gives Smoke and Ryder. Even when he was betrayed by Dimitri he didn't show enough anger. He feels empty because revenge isn't the option something Roman tells him and he ignores like the rest of the story. Roman is a more endearing character than Niko any day.

I'm Not bashing the game of GTA4, I would chose it over any game for this generation so far. I just think when compared to a Game like San Andreas it falls into the category of eh.

The DLC was what made GTA4 a hit for me I play TBOGT to this day. But i still find myself on certain days of the week going back to SA for the feel of fun and freedom you get in it. as oppose to dreary you get in GTA 4.

This post has been edited by loki18760 on Monday, Aug 20 2012, 04:45

[bud23]

QUOTE (Miamivicecity @ Thursday, Aug 2 2012, 23:25)

QUOTE (bud23 @ Friday, Aug 3 2012, 05:26) You guys forget that SA is a game of 2004, R* pushed at the limit the capacity of the ps2, what you are speaking was just impossible in a hardware of 2004. Sorry to be blunt, but the cities in SA are lifeless compared to GTA IV's LC whether people want to admit it or not. I'm not talking about graphics or physics, but the way things are operated with peds performing simple actions like construction workers working, peds talking on phones, doing yogo in parks, trash collectors working etc. All of which bring the city to life. It's not just compared to SA either. Even compared to the majority of sandbox games this generation GTA IV's LC is one of the few cities that actually feels real with a sense of believability. As I said at the start of this thread I do think SA's map is quite impressive especially for how old it is, but GTA IV did do an urban environment much better than SA.

Of course, and if I you go to the future and buys a copy of GTA X,GTA V would be crap for you.

Imo, we can´t compare things as the detail or the depth between games built over different hardware. What you always says about GTAIV, the number of peds , the sensation of a living city, the amount of activities like watch TV or play bowling...simply was not possible in ps2/III era.

I compare games through the impact and trascendence over gamer community.
I lived very close the pre/post release of San Andreas and the impact over the gamers, hardcore and casual, is simply incomparable with another GTA.
San Andreas is the masterpiece of Rockstar so far,this game was the true "Tour de force" for Rockstar. The influence that Rockstar has now is mostly due to San Andreas.

GTAIV was a good game and obviously you can´t compare the detail of a Ps3 game with the depth of a ps2 game. With San Andreas Rockstar made a game that in 2004 seemed unattainable, and that's something you can't say about gta IV.

[MyDog]

QUOTE (loki18760 @ Monday, Aug 20 2012, 04:24)

@mydog "His backstory is thin? How is it thinner than any other protagonist's backstory?" Because it is, GTA SA since that is what this topic is about. YOu learned about his chiildhood about his childhood friends About his mother, his dead brother, Sweet, smoke rider, they all have a place in his history and you learn that through the story of the game. Niko you learn "We know that he's from a village in Serbia. We know his mother's name. The reasons for Niko's arrival to Liberty " and that he was in a war and he is cousins with Roman.

Being less explained than CJ's backstory doesn't make it a thin one. What about Claude, Toni and Vic's backstories?

[loki18760]

QUOTE (MyDog @ Monday, Aug 20 2012, 10:08)

Being less explained than CJ's backstory doesn't make it a thin one. What about Claude, Toni and Vic's backstories?

The fact of the matter is after a more complete story people don't expect less, they expect more. I Didn't like Vic's either, or Tony's they both fail too, but ill excuse them because they were a way of cashing in after SA. R* has admitted themselves it wasn't there finest work.

Claude had established a back story Via SA because R* thought it was too to thin and people ask for more about Claude, and how he meet Catalina in the first place. Claude's back story was more forgiven being that he didn't talk.

On topic: This was about whether or not SA is overrated. I say no, the fan base that has been build around it is rightly deserved. It was instrumental in adding a crap ton of fans, and played to a younger audience. Is it overrated is a matter of opinion but you can't deny that the fans of GTA SA are the first to defend it, more than any other GTA game. Their Loyalty to their favorite GTA game alone tells you that it isn't overrated.

AND for the people that keep coming onto me for my opinion it that. I'm A big gta fan and always have, I would chose pretty much any gta game over any other game on the market. I play GTA: BTOGT because it in the newest of them that is enjoyable, but SA will always be my favorite until another surpasses it.

[PaddsterG2k3]

Ok, my tuppence worth.

Slightly off topic, but I feel you cannot slate III if you did not play it as the first 3D game. It was mesmerizing at the time - comparing it to the others now is taking it out of context.

In addition to this, I don't think you can slate SA's map for 'boring, wasted space', if you didn't play VC before it. VC is amazing, with, I agree, a better story than SA. But - it had one of the worst maps. A beach that took up 1/4 of the map was most certainly wasted space - one which irked many, many people on here at the time, which is why SA's map was so lauded at praised at the time - people felt it wasn't wasted space when comparing it to the previous entry, VC.

SA probably is a bit overrated. Like all GTAs it is a masterpiece. Some parts got rather silly - I found the character of Wu Zi to be utterly silly. Hes meant to be a Triad warlord for goodness sake. Aside from that I feel SA still deserves the praise it gets.

Certain SA fanboys do get a tad carried away, shall we say.

[ClaudeSpeedRulez]

QUOTE (PaddsterG2k3 @ Tuesday, Aug 21 2012, 11:00)

[...]I found the character of Wu Zi to be utterly silly. Hes meant to be a Triad warlord for goodness sake.[...]

This was one of the most disappointing things in San Andreas, for me.

I, as a GTA 1 player, know that the Triads leader in GTA 1 was Uncle Fu -one of my favorites characters in the whole series.
And it ruined, the already ruined, GTA: San Andreas chances of shine.
This Wu Zi Mu guy just don't work for me, he doesn't deserve to be the Triads leader.

PS: Everything written above is my personal opinion, please, don't bash me, it's not my fault.