GTA: III, GTA: VC, GTA: SA, GTA: IV...
Buckaroo Banzai
great game. And that's the best I can say for it. Stacked up to *any
other* game, and it's tip-top. But against previous GTA's?
I'm sorry. I never played GTA before PS2, and I never played GTA PSP, or
the LCS port. So based on the PS2 games I've played, IV really sucks.
Every GTA game I've played since III, has expanded both the story,
environment, weapons, side-missions, vehicles, etc. EVERY GAME has offered
more. It culminated in GTA: SA- Not just sections of cities (Los Santos,
San Fierro, Las Venturas), but sections of a state (San Andreas). Not just
cars, but bicycles, and go-karts and hover craft and jet packs... not to
mention PLANES! Well, of course you all know that I could go on and on
regarding SA... but IV? Sorry. The game is beautiful, and there's lots to
appreciate, but they just took away too much of what we were used to.... I
want a GTA: SA port to the PS3
phexitol
>
> ... I want a GTA: SA port to the PS3
>
I seriously doubt that'll ever happen, but I'd buy it in an instant.
IMHO, GTA IV is the 2nd best GTA game. Here is my ranking of the GTA
games that I've played:
(1) GTA: San Andreas
(2) GTA IV
(3) GTA III
(4) GTA VC
(5) GTA LCS
(6) GTA VCS - this game made me hate Rockstar Leeds
With that being said, I don't hold up high hopes for GTA: CW. That
doesn't really bother me, since I don't have a DS, but I just don't
think Rockstar Leeds should ever be let near another GTA title again.
Paul Heslop
>
> "Buckaroo Banzai" <blister...@yahoo.com> wroteth:
>
> >
> > ... I want a GTA: SA port to the PS3
> >
>
> I seriously doubt that'll ever happen, but I'd buy it in an instant.
>
> IMHO, GTA IV is the 2nd best GTA game. Here is my ranking of the GTA
> games that I've played:
>
> (1) GTA: San Andreas
> (2) GTA IV
> (3) GTA III
> (4) GTA VC
> (5) GTA LCS
> (6) GTA VCS - this game made me hate Rockstar Leeds
disappointment I would feel for GTA IV :O)
>
> With that being said, I don't hold up high hopes for GTA: CW. That
> doesn't really bother me, since I don't have a DS, but I just don't
> think Rockstar Leeds should ever be let near another GTA title again.
I don't own a nintendo and don't like handhelds, so they can do what
the hell they want on those, just don't port it to the 360! :O)
Recently our xbox san andreas got scratched so I fired up the ps2
version. ARGH! RED ALERT! do NOT return to ps2 version of SA after
playing GTA IV. It looks like it has been smeared in mud or something.
Hideous, awful. My best game ever now looks sad, tired and like a
second rate mess.
Vice city stories really really really should never made the bigger
machines. It's crap, garbage, shit, boring, awful. The best thing
about it is the thing where it maps the balloons you popped. I would
have liked that one to be carried over, specially for the pigeons.
Right, GTA IV... well, I played the first games, I loved them, had an
editor for designing my own cars, played them all the time. Driver
came along for the playstation and blew them out of the water. GTA 3
felt like a copy to me, but it was a great game but from here on they
were all on the same machine, so to speak and were limited by its
capabilities but each expanded on the last.
Though I am disappointed by GTA IV in some areas I also recognize that
it is a new beginning, it's on new machinery and really testing the
water. It really is GTA III next gen, and in that way is probably
wayyyyyyy better than GTA III, so it works. Our problem is we're
comparing it to the last of a generation and the real test will be the
next one, which must add some of the cool touches we're waiting for.
A big yay for GTA IV, leading the way for the brilliant things to
come!
--
Paul (We won't die of devotion)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
Buckaroo Banzai
"Paul Heslop" <paul....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:488AFC76...@blueyonder.co.uk...
> phexitol wrote:
>>
>> "Buckaroo Banzai" <blister...@yahoo.com> wroteth:
>>
>> >
>> > ... I want a GTA: SA port to the PS3
>> >
>>
>> I seriously doubt that'll ever happen, but I'd buy it in an instant.
>>
>> IMHO, GTA IV is the 2nd best GTA game. Here is my ranking of the GTA
>> games that I've played:
>>
>> (1) GTA: San Andreas
>> (2) GTA IV
>> (3) GTA III
>> (4) GTA VC
>> (5) GTA LCS
>> (6) GTA VCS - this game made me hate Rockstar Leeds
> sucks donkey balls doesn't it? this game prepared me for any
> disappointment I would feel for GTA IV :O)
>
>>
>> With that being said, I don't hold up high hopes for GTA: CW.
I'm ignorant- CW? The independent network that was formerly known as The
WB?
>> That doesn't really bother me, since I don't have a DS, but I just don't
>> think Rockstar Leeds should ever be let near another GTA title again.
I know Rockstar... but Leeds? Why wouldn't you want *Rockstar* near
another GTA title?
>
> I don't own a nintendo and don't like handhelds, so they can do what
> the hell they want on those, just don't port it to the 360! :O)\
no opinion.
>
> Recently our xbox san andreas got scratched so I fired up the ps2
> version. ARGH! RED ALERT! do NOT return to ps2 version of SA after
> playing GTA IV. It looks like it has been smeared in mud or something.
> Hideous, awful. My best game ever now looks sad, tired and like a
> second rate mess.
*XBOX*... Ah.... must... fight... fanboy... tendencies....
"It looks like"... that I can deal with... If it plays great, I can forgive
the looks... much like chicks...
>
> Vice city stories really really really should never made the bigger
> machines. It's crap, garbage, shit, boring, awful. The best thing
> about it is the thing where it maps the balloons you popped. I would
> have liked that one to be carried over, specially for the pigeons.
>
> Right, GTA IV... well, I played the first games, I loved them, had an
> editor for designing my own cars, played them all the time.
Huh? What is this?
> Driver
> came along for the playstation and blew them out of the water. GTA 3
> felt like a copy to me, but it was a great game but from here on they
> were all on the same machine, so to speak and were limited by its
> capabilities but each expanded on the last.
>
> Though I am disappointed by GTA IV in some areas I also recognize that
> it is a new beginning, it's on new machinery and really testing the
> water. It really is GTA III next gen, and in that way is probably
> wayyyyyyy better than GTA III, so it works.
I have to humbly disagree. Every GTA game since III has eclipsed the last-
until IV. I'm sorry but that's unacceptable. This is, what? Seventh
Generation? Ridicoulous media storage? And you can't slap a parachute or
plane around Niko? I'm sorry but FAIL.
> Our problem is we're
> comparing it to the last of a generation and the real test will be the
> next one, which must add some of the cool touches we're waiting for.
<cough> EXCUSE <cough>
>
> A big yay for GTA IV, leading the way for the brilliant things to
> come!
A big boo for GTA IV, sacrificing looks for gameplay. (although I love the
taxis)
Paul Heslop
the first games, the top down ones, you could get these programs which
allowed you to edit and design your own cars and put them in the game.
Wasn't brilliant, they were very 2d but at the time it was pretty
revolutionary. I wish i could recall the name of the thing but it
added a new dimension to a game and made it kind of endless really.
>
> > Driver
> > came along for the playstation and blew them out of the water. GTA 3
> > felt like a copy to me, but it was a great game but from here on they
> > were all on the same machine, so to speak and were limited by its
> > capabilities but each expanded on the last.
> >
> > Though I am disappointed by GTA IV in some areas I also recognize that
> > it is a new beginning, it's on new machinery and really testing the
> > water. It really is GTA III next gen, and in that way is probably
> > wayyyyyyy better than GTA III, so it works.
>
> I have to humbly disagree. Every GTA game since III has eclipsed the last-
> until IV. I'm sorry but that's unacceptable. This is, what? Seventh
> Generation? Ridicoulous media storage? And you can't slap a parachute or
> plane around Niko? I'm sorry but FAIL.
>
It really is breaking new ground. I understand how you feel, I feel
that way too, but they're kind of testing the water here. I have one
or two games on the 360 which, although they could be cool, have so
many glitches it makes them a pain to play. People seem to think that
pushing something to its limits is a great thing, I'd rather have
something which is worked within the limits and that actually works.
> > Our problem is we're
> > comparing it to the last of a generation and the real test will be the
> > next one, which must add some of the cool touches we're waiting for.
>
> <cough> EXCUSE <cough>
>
> >
> > A big yay for GTA IV, leading the way for the brilliant things to
> > come!
>
> A big boo for GTA IV, sacrificing looks for gameplay. (although I love the
> taxis)
:O) I do like it when we talk dirty.
Paul C.
news:SBvik.16358$mh5....@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com:
> I *really* didn't want to not like GTA: IV. And actually, I don't-
> it's a great game. And that's the best I can say for it. Stacked up
> to *any other* game, and it's tip-top. But against previous GTA's?
<snip>
*shrug* I never really cared for any of that silly crap in San Andreas
anyway. So it was big, a big giant area filled with basically nothing
didn't make for any more enjoyment. Bikes were a novelty. The jet pack was
amusing I suppose. Basically once you finish playing the stories the fun is
mostly gone from a game like GTA. Multiplayer is a lot of fun & adds a lot
more replay value then gimmicky vehicles IMHO. Despite what you may think
there are many people out there who do play multiplayer properly it's not
all a bunch of jokers who just want to mess around. I'm not saying you're
wrong just putting forward the case for those who find GTA IV to be an
extremely enjoyable game that was well crafted.
Paul Heslop
I just wish that multiplayer was included on the console itself. The
only way two family members can play each other is to have two
machines, two games and two gold accounts. smacks of money making.
Paul C.
> I just wish that multiplayer was included on the console itself. The
> only way two family members can play each other is to have two
> machines, two games and two gold accounts. smacks of money making.
That's why my online play is limited to the PS3 version which costs me
nothing. I'm not renewing my 360 account until I'm interested in a game
with online play for that system again. :)
Paul Heslop
I'm not a big fan of online play. More so when rewards are tallied to
it as it kind of forces you to participate.
I have already got the gold account on the 360 so it's there if I need
it, but mainly I use it for 'muling' passing vehicles between accounts
on driving games etc. I did try OLP on GTAIV but it isn't my scene
really. with family you know what you're doing, you know who you're
dealing with and your own in jokes are half of the fun.
Buckaroo Banzai
>> >
>> > Right, GTA IV... well, I played the first games, I loved them, had an
>> > editor for designing my own cars, played them all the time.
>>
>> Huh? What is this?
>
> the first games, the top down ones, you could get these programs which
> allowed you to edit and design your own cars and put them in the game.
> Wasn't brilliant, they were very 2d but at the time it was pretty
> revolutionary. I wish i could recall the name of the thing but it
> added a new dimension to a game and made it kind of endless really.
Ah... I tried the GTA just before London.... top down, didn't really like
it.
>
>>
>> > Driver
>> > came along for the playstation and blew them out of the water. GTA 3
>> > felt like a copy to me, but it was a great game but from here on they
>> > were all on the same machine, so to speak and were limited by its
>> > capabilities but each expanded on the last.
>> >
>> > Though I am disappointed by GTA IV in some areas I also recognize that
>> > it is a new beginning, it's on new machinery and really testing the
>> > water. It really is GTA III next gen, and in that way is probably
>> > wayyyyyyy better than GTA III, so it works.
>>
>> I have to humbly disagree. Every GTA game since III has eclipsed the
>> last-
>> until IV. I'm sorry but that's unacceptable. This is, what? Seventh
>> Generation? Ridicoulous media storage? And you can't slap a parachute
>> or
>> plane around Niko? I'm sorry but FAIL.
>>
> It really is breaking new ground. I understand how you feel, I feel
> that way too, but they're kind of testing the water here. I have one
> or two games on the 360 which, although they could be cool, have so
> many glitches it makes them a pain to play. People seem to think that
> pushing something to its limits is a great thing, I'd rather have
> something which is worked within the limits and that actually works.
Well, I *would* agree with you, but remember- PS1 gen gaming= top down
graphics... PS2 gen gaming= GTAIII- That game also 'tested the waters' but
it also blew everything that came before it away. I sincerely don't think
it's too much to expect IV to blow SA out of the testing waters.... I'm
sorry but I think R* blew it. Mind you I'm not saying that IV isn't a fun
game, it is. But it's not worthy to succeed SA. Especially the bikes!
>
>> > Our problem is we're
>> > comparing it to the last of a generation and the real test will be the
>> > next one, which must add some of the cool touches we're waiting for.
>>
>> <cough> EXCUSE <cough>
>>
>> >
>> > A big yay for GTA IV, leading the way for the brilliant things to
>> > come!
>>
>> A big boo for GTA IV, sacrificing looks for gameplay. (although I love
>> the
>> taxis)
>
> :O) I do like it when we talk dirty.
LOL! I'm lovin' ya Paul!
phexitol
>
> I'm ignorant- CW? The independent network that was formerly known as
> The WB?
>
GTA: Chinatown Wars - the new one they're making for the Nintendo DS
>
>>> That doesn't really bother me, since I don't have a DS, but I just
>>> don't think Rockstar Leeds should ever be let near another GTA title
>>> again.
>
> I know Rockstar... but Leeds? Why wouldn't you want *Rockstar* near
> another GTA title?
>
Rockstar Leeds is a sub(par)sidiary of Rockstar Games. They are the weak
link in an otherwise brilliant company. They developed Liberty City
Stories, which was quite good. Then they decided to throw all good will
to the wind and develop Vice City Stories, the absolute shittiest GTA
game ever made. A brilliant soundtrack and a couple of other interesting
new features are marred by some of the worst AI and scripted crap that
has ever been seen in a 3d GTA game (don't know about the topdowns;
never played them).
Ever wonder how much fun it would be to be locked into an enclosed area
surrounded by respawning enemies that all have accurate long-range auto-
aim, who are themselves obscured by lots of trees and bushes, while your
own aim won't point at them unless you're standing right next to them or
can see them - and if/when you complete that area, you then have to
chase and shoot a guy on quad bikes, or else start the whole mission
over again? Ever wish enemies would spawn directly in front of your
safehouse door, preventing you from leaving? Ever wanted to do tough-as-
nails missions in order to save the life of a character that has long
ago been revealed to be a worthless piece of back-stabbing shit? Play
Vice City Stories and wonder no more.
Anssi Saari
>>> With that being said, I don't hold up high hopes for GTA: CW.
>
> I'm ignorant- CW? The independent network that was formerly known as The
> WB?
Chinatown Wars. Announced for Nintendo DS in E3 I believe. Should be
out this year.
>>> That doesn't really bother me, since I don't have a DS, but I just don't
>>> think Rockstar Leeds should ever be let near another GTA title again.
>
> I know Rockstar... but Leeds? Why wouldn't you want *Rockstar* near
> another GTA title?
Rockstar Leeds is the 'B' team who developed LCS and VCS. The 'A' team
is Rockstar North in Edinburgh. In my opinion, both LCS and VCS are
OK. Not great, but OK. Solid GTA entertainment with some gameplay
improvements over GTA3 and Vice City.
Come to think of it, the games are fine technically, they just didn't
have a decent writer, so the main plots and characters in both games
are bad, to put it mildly. Especially in VCS.
Paul Heslop
I wish i could recall the name of the thing but it
> > added a new dimension to a game and made it kind of endless really.
>
> Ah... I tried the GTA just before London.... top down, didn't really like
> it.
>
carmaggedon too
> > It really is breaking new ground. I understand how you feel, I feel
> > that way too, but they're kind of testing the water here. I have one
> > or two games on the 360 which, although they could be cool, have so
> > many glitches it makes them a pain to play. People seem to think that
> > pushing something to its limits is a great thing, I'd rather have
> > something which is worked within the limits and that actually works.
>
> Well, I *would* agree with you, but remember- PS1 gen gaming= top down
> graphics... PS2 gen gaming= GTAIII- That game also 'tested the waters' but
> it also blew everything that came before it away. I sincerely don't think
> it's too much to expect IV to blow SA out of the testing waters.... I'm
> sorry but I think R* blew it. Mind you I'm not saying that IV isn't a fun
> game, it is. But it's not worthy to succeed SA. Especially the bikes!
>
There are really some things they should have just put in for fun.
maybe they're sick of being attacked for making violence fun.
> >> A big boo for GTA IV, sacrificing looks for gameplay. (although I love
> >> the
> >> taxis)
> >
> > :O) I do like it when we talk dirty.
>
> LOL! I'm lovin' ya Paul!
*blush*
:O))
Paul Heslop
Have you tried Scarface? It has foibles, but in a way it feels like a
lost GTA game. I really enjoyed it for a time, filled a gap, so to
speak.
Buckaroo Banzai
>>
>> Ever wonder how much fun it would be to be locked into an enclosed area
>> surrounded by respawning enemies that all have accurate long-range auto-
>> aim, who are themselves obscured by lots of trees and bushes, while your
>> own aim won't point at them unless you're standing right next to them or
>> can see them - and if/when you complete that area, you then have to
>> chase and shoot a guy on quad bikes, or else start the whole mission
>> over again? Ever wish enemies would spawn directly in front of your
>> safehouse door, preventing you from leaving? Ever wanted to do tough-as-
>> nails missions in order to save the life of a character that has long
>> ago been revealed to be a worthless piece of back-stabbing shit? Play
>> Vice City Stories and wonder no more.
>
> Have you tried Scarface? It has foibles, but in a way it feels like a
> lost GTA game. I really enjoyed it for a time, filled a gap, so to
> speak.
must... not... say it... arrghh! That's what she said!
Paul Heslop
:O)
phexitol
Paul Heslop <paul....@blueyonder.co.uk> yelled out:
> Have you tried Scarface? It has foibles, but in a way it feels like a
> lost GTA game. I really enjoyed it for a time, filled a gap, so to
> speak.
>
Yep. I'm stuck on the mission where you have to escort the brave weakling
out of the nightclub. I find the combat mostly to my liking, but I'm not
too good at keeping other people alive (those poor henchmen). At least
they have a chance, since they're armed. The poor shmuck in the nightclub
is your average weak NPC, no weapons or fighting ability. Yet, he still
insists on putting himself in harm's way. I wish there were an open-source
sandbox game/engine, with minimal coding involved, so I could show people
how to make an escort mission.
Paul Heslop
It's a little bastard of a mission for sure. hated it a lot. If i
recall rightly it's a almost a case of timing, getting it just right.
Try to clear as many from the club area when you go up the stairs from
the toilets, then they're not just going to pop up and start plugging
him.
probably the worst part is after you exit the building, as you still
have to get him to the gate while keeping yourself and him alive, once
you do get him to the gate just turn and keep shooting, staying
between him and them.