[Tycek]

And here too...not.

First I think this whole topic is unfair and faulty. How can you compare one game to whole series of games. It would be fair to compare IV to III as both of them were first in the series, but in that comparison IV is light years ahead.

But if you wanna play it your way, here you go. I enjoyed so called 3D era, but it was years ago. Only games that can stand to IV in terms of enjoyment are VC and VCS, because both of them can defend theirself with atmosphere and soundtrack. Rest of the games in the series are just got older in not very nice way. GTA III is still playable as a game that put R* on the throne of open world crime games, but games like LCS or SA don't have anything to offer.

I'm enjoying IV till these days (I was playing TLaD today) and I still find it amusing and interesting. I still find new things and have fun with old ones. So, real answer to this question is no. Out with the old in with the new. We can't deny that 3D era was great and it built base to all future generations, but we also can't deny the fact that it got older. It's not as fun as it used to be and IV backed up with more advance technology is just simply better.

We can make proper comparison when R* decide to end HD era and start new one. I wonder if that will ever happen?

[loki18760]

My reply to this is... The last era was better, of corse not in terms of graphics or game play. But because it felt better you went into those games and could feel at ease playing them.

GTA-4 the only one of the new era we have to compare to is stress-fully real it takes to much of the fun away when you second guessing coming out from behind a wall, and yet it has no way to releave it because nearly all the side missions are connected to the story. I get tired of the stress of the game, the only way to releave the it is too blow up random people.

Sidemission for the last era were more fun and didn't require a contact and had more replayablity as some mission in GTA4 weren't available in later stages of the game. I for one spent countless hours delivering pizza when i got frustrated at a mission in a game, Or did vigilante missions that didn't have an end and were randomized along with countless taxi mission because i felt like driving with a mission.

I think that the new era has things going for it but as it stands with GTA4 not counting the DLC it sucks. The DLC is a redeemer for this era so far. But i hope to not see a disappointment such as GTA 4 again.

BTW i don't count LCS and VCS stories as last era they were a poorly done money scheme by R8 for money and they should have been ashamed of themselves for calling them full games when they are less fulling then DLC

[StoneHead37]

A very tough call here.

The GTA III era has some of the best games I've ever played, especially with III, VC and SA. In addition to those amazing titles, Advance wasn't half bad (better than most of the sh*t on the Gameboy at the time), LCS was well-scripted and sui generis and VCS was very comical and very unique. Each game was written very well, with great detail in characters, plot and background which is commonly ignored to a certain extent nowadays. Of course, fun and mayhem (ahem, especially SA) was also a big part. If you don't feel like doing a mission or whatever, you could always just pick up a flamethrower or rocket launcher and run around the city blowing up cars and people like someone out of a Michael Bay movie or push endless amounts of unwary pedestrians onto the train tracks to watch them crumble once the train makes the final turn or whatever type of special idea of fun you may think of.

The GTA IV era, though has much less games than the III era, has GTA IV (in my opinion, the best game to date), in addition to the amazing supporting DLCs, The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony. Even though I cannot play Chinatown Wars for too long as it strains my eyes, it was decent. I didn't like the fact of having no voice actors, but everything else was up to par (most things). The IV era has just the perfect amount of realism and fun that I would like. Over-the-top action is not required to have a fun game. Setting up certain scenarios with the spectacular environment around you, whether it be a police chase or the ultimate heist, always was more fun that just driving a tank off a roof onto a crowd of people and just tirelessly firing at people over and over again. Let's also remember that the mission structure and story of GTA IV (and the DLCs) cannot be matched, in my opinion.

All in all, though hard to pick, the GTA IV era wins.

[Macavell]

QUOTE (Tycek @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 16:39)

GTA III is still playable as a game that put R* on the throne of open world crime games, but games like LCS or SA don't have anything to offer. [...] It's not as fun as it used to be and IV backed up with more advance technology is just simply better.

Now, do you have any idea of good games...? I don't think so...

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (Tycek @ Monday, Aug 20 2012, 01:39)

And here too...not. First I think this whole topic is unfair and faulty. How can you compare one game to whole series of games. It would be fair to compare IV to III as both of them were first in the series, but in that comparison IV is light years ahead. But if you wanna play it your way, here you go. I enjoyed so called 3D era, but it was years ago. Only games that can stand to IV in terms of enjoyment are VC and VCS, because both of them can defend theirself with atmosphere and soundtrack. Rest of the games in the series are just got older in not very nice way. GTA III is still playable as a game that put R* on the throne of open world crime games, but games like LCS or SA don't have anything to offer. I'm enjoying IV till these days (I was playing TLaD today) and I still find it amusing and interesting. I still find new things and have fun with old ones. So, real answer to this question is no. Out with the old in with the new. We can't deny that 3D era was great and it built base to all future generations, but we also can't deny the fact that it got older. It's not as fun as it used to be and IV backed up with more advance technology is just simply better. We can make proper comparison when R* decide to end HD era and start new one. I wonder if that will ever happen?

To be honest if I had a time machine I'd go back to around 2002 when I got GTA III and give myself a copy of GTA IV. If a game like GTA IV with so much detail and depth was possible back then I would be more blown away then I was with the GTA III era GTAs.

Like you I just don't find them as fun anymore. Everytime I start a new a save I usually say to myself "f*ck it" and abandon the save. The thing is it's not due to playing them to death. I only finished GTA III once, VC twice and I never finished the stories in SA, LCS and VCS. In SA I got right upto before "End Of The Line".

I don't know, but when GTA IV came out it just had the right chemistry. Most things others don't like I love. It's just my kind of GTA even though VC is sentimental to me because it's set in the year I was born so I never got to experience that time period.

As far as I'm concerned VC is still the best pre-GTA IV GTA. I never jumped on SA's bandwagon when it was new. I have and always will prefer VC's simplicity without the reliance on the abunbance of features, but on the other end I just can't get enough of GTA IV.

If it were possible I'd force GTA IV and VC to get married and the baby would most likely come out with a Hawaiian shirt and a hard edged Eastern European face. It'd be the most epic baby ever concieved.

[Tycek]

I'm a bit on different level than you MVC. I was growing up with the series and I may add that I was raised by it. Kid raised by GTA, Fallouts and Half Life. Because of that simple fact I think I got something to say here. I was seeing how this series was becoming big and how it was claiming it's rights to open world crime games throne. I've completed all of them many times (GTA around 10 times, VC around 8 times, SA 5 times, VCS 3 times, etc), but some of these games just didn't have it's power for another time. And San Andreas was one of them. First time was great (I've completed almost everything, except those stupid "Colllect all the bubbles in 3:35" missions), but every another was worse, story wasn't addicting, missions were boring and all these simlish additions were simply annoying or useless. I would probably stop with GTA if next one will be SA 2, but fortunately R* found out that they choose wrong way and decided to make one step back and two steps forward.
They cut every useless crap and made GTA "back to basics" with everything that was great in series. That's why HD era is more enjoyable then 3D era, because it's simply gives you best of the best of every game made before. Similar statement can be made about VC (because it has all that make GTA briliant with addition of few enjoyable things - buying houses, changing clothes, planes, atmosphere, soundtrack, etc) and VCS (which was almost like VC with few additions).

This post has been edited by Tycek on Tuesday, Aug 21 2012, 10:44

[BabeRuth]

QUOTE (Tycek @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 14:39)

And here too...not. First I think this whole topic is unfair and faulty. How can you compare one game to whole series of games. It would be fair to compare IV to III as both of them were first in the series, but in that comparison IV is light years ahead. But if you wanna play it your way, here you go. I enjoyed so called 3D era, but it was years ago. Only games that can stand to IV in terms of enjoyment are VC and VCS, because both of them can defend theirself with atmosphere and soundtrack. Rest of the games in the series are just got older in not very nice way. GTA III is still playable as a game that put R* on the throne of open world crime games, but games like LCS or SA don't have anything to offer. I'm enjoying IV till these days (I was playing TLaD today) and I still find it amusing and interesting. I still find new things and have fun with old ones. So, real answer to this question is no. Out with the old in with the new. We can't deny that 3D era was great and it built base to all future generations, but we also can't deny the fact that it got older. It's not as fun as it used to be and IV backed up with more advance technology is just simply better. We can make proper comparison when R* decide to end HD era and start new one. I wonder if that will ever happen?

Another idiotic person comparing a 04 game to an 08 game.....nice round of applause.

[Tycek]

Another f*cking asshole who can't understand that people may have different opinion than his own.

You guys are simply unable to understand simple truth. There are people with different opinions, but you SA fanboys with brain capacity of a shrimp will call idiot everybody who don't like SA.

This post has been edited by Tycek on Sunday, Aug 26 2012, 08:58

[BabeRuth]

Sorry if i pushed your button

We are all entitled to our own opinions

I just hate it when people compare IV's graphics, and other cool/sweet things to SA it just annoys me.

Obviously I misunderstood you, and i apologize.

This post has been edited by BabeRuth on Saturday, Aug 25 2012, 07:52

[Tycek]

I believe it's okay to defend your point of view as long as you're doing it in civilized manner. Calling other people idiots isn't the best way to do it.

Note also that topics like these are mostly based on personal opinions and hence subjective. There is no point is starting flamewars if we don't want to have this thread locked.

I tried to refrain from comparing these games, but in fact it's impossible to state your opinion in topic mostly based on comparisons between eras. You also said that comparing game from '04 to game from '08 is not sensible. But where is the borderline in this case? 4 years of difference makes comparison not possible. What happens if we compare two games, one from 2002 and other 2004. Is that comparison valid? If not, we also shouldn't compare VC and SA.

[Flesh-n-Bone]

About 10 million times. The III era is just wacky, cartoony fun. IV is frustrating

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (Flesh-n-Bone @ Sunday, Aug 26 2012, 07:36)

IV is frustrating

Blasphemy.
















This post has been edited by Miamivicecity on Sunday, Aug 26 2012, 02:31

[arijitsen]

Three Cheer's for III Era ...
III ERA is the best..
Anyone agree...??

[BabeRuth]

Hip-hip hooray, hip-hip hooray, hip-hip hooray! .

[dragon_goran_mijo]

Nope. I prefer GTA IV's togetherness, they all seemed to link because they did.

The senseless violence in GTA 3 era games was fun in short bursts. People will say that the 3D era was longer, I disagree. Being able to chose different scenarios in IV made it addicting. I can barely play any GTA 3 era game after playing IV. IV just raised the bar in storyline development and atmosphere. IV Liberty is the best GTA city ever, it is so vibrant and alive. The internet in IV made LC feel like the world, and it captured the city so well. The DLC packs made the entire story make sense, and I hope in V it is all DLC because multiple GTA games that really don't relate to each other feels...lonely.

This post has been edited by dragon_goran_mijo on Sunday, Sep 2 2012, 17:46

[Coat.]

QUOTE (ZoomZoom @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 13:00)

QUOTE (lzw3 @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 08:21) QUOTE (Th3MaN1 @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 18:12) QUOTE (Macavell @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 10:56) No doubt, the III era was much better than the IV era. Same here. And here. And here too!!!

+ me as well.

[Redketman]

Absolutely. GTA III and San Andreas are the most memorable games for me. GTA IV, on the other hand, focused too much on realism and didn't have so many good new features. In fact many aspects from a game like San Andreas were gone. No rampages, tanks, gang wars, buying houses, and such. Chinatown Wars was in many ways more entertaining than GTA IV because it didn't focus on realism and it was cool to play something very unique for once. Chinatown Wars was a top-down GTA game but had 3D elements and many interesting mini-games. I also thing the soundtrack was better in games like GTA III and San Andreas if I compare with the IV era.

[Mr_Leone]

GTA III! LCS, VCS, VC, SA, LCS...amazing games.

This post has been edited by Mr_Leone on Wednesday, Sep 12 2012, 17:08

[Miamivicecity]

QUOTE (dragon_goran_mijo @ Monday, Sep 3 2012, 04:39)

Nope. I prefer GTA IV's togetherness, they all seemed to link because they did. The senseless violence in GTA 3 era games was fun in short bursts. People will say that the 3D era was longer, I disagree. Being able to chose different scenarios in IV made it addicting. I can barely play any GTA 3 era game after playing IV. IV just raised the bar in storyline development and atmosphere. IV Liberty is the best GTA city ever, it is so vibrant and alive. The internet in IV made LC feel like the world, and it captured the city so well. The DLC packs made the entire story make sense, and I hope in V it is all DLC because multiple GTA games that really don't relate to each other feels...lonely.

VC is the only GTA III era GTA I still like playing. The rest are "Meh. This was more fun when I was younger". IMO it has trascended time better than any of the others.

For one it doesn't bore me like GTA III does and Tommy is a more likeable protagonist to me than CJ. Sure the map is small, but the game oozes character which GTA III and SA seem to lack. Once again only my opinion.

Honestly if it wasn't for VC I don't think I'd have much interest in the GTA III era now. GTA IV really is better in more ways than one.

[theworldfamous]

No I don't.. there's a part of me that thinks it did, but that's just nostalgia. And the III era has 3 games, IV only 1 (technically) so it's a bit unfair to compare them, cause IV didn't have multiple locations and time periods to work with. But it did bring a lot of new depth that gave it a whole new level to enjoy it on.