GTA IV = A-? Something wicked this way comes...

[BigZell2020]

I think GR hit it right on the head with this review. Yes, the game introduces new things like the phone, and mini games with friends...but it neglects things that greatly affect the gameplay. Seems like everyone is a little too gung-ho about a few additions that while they compliment the game nicely....have a replay value of zilch. Honestly, after playing each mini-game once, I never touched them again. I would have much preferred a seamless control/targeting system ala Assassin's Creed, than to be able to go play darts...which, takes all of 10 seconds to perfect and then an additional 5 seconds to get bored with.

The missions were also pretty standard issue, "go take out the target, he will be heavily gaurded..." they didn't need to re-hash the same idea for every mission. When COD4 came out I was thinking all the missions were going to be similar to past COD games...shoot a bunch of enemies, move up, shoot a bunch more, move up etc... then they come out of nowhere with one of the most epic sniping missions any game has ever seen and blew me away. By the time I got to the end of GTA IV, I felt as if I had been playing the same mission over and over again.

I made it through the single player in 3 days, and have spent the past week trying to force myself to like the multiplayer. Just like the review said, the IDEA of many of the online games is good, but the execution seems pretty half baked. The lag is often horrible, the interface for setting up matches is as clunky as they come, there is no forced auto balance so you get clowns switching teams and making it 10 vs. 4 just because they want the cash for winning....which gets you essentially nothing but new clothing for your character.

The game has all the over the top insanely funny GTA action, but misses the mark on a some things that are crucial to the gameplay (mainly the cumbersome movement/ targeting).

 

[-FCM-]

I think the missions are about as varied as they can be, and if they don't tickle your fancy, there is darts and whatnot. Nitpicking is easy in a game so gigantic. You could call Bioshock repetitive, it doesn't mean it's not a masterpiece.

I see nothing wrong with the targetting system. The cover system is great, you can turn off auto-aim if you really want, hitting people in strategic body parts. The beauty of this game really is the detail. It's as if they took the biggest videogame that already existed and filled it in with all the little details and animations and nuances. I see something new and awesome every time I play. And it's for that reason that I believe the game is remarkable enough to deserve an A. Maybe I just love the game so much that anything feels like a nitpick, but I don't consider myself to be "easy" as far as game-love goes seeing as how 9 out of 10 times I feel a game is overrated, and GR's review felt like someone complaining about some of the candlewax melting on their birthday cake, and it's just like, "really?" I dunno. It's their job to nitpick though.

But I've said enough, this is probably like my fourth post here or something. A review's a review, it happened with FFVII and...that one. Rez? Did Rez get a C? Eh, that sucked too. Everyone has their (arguably, to be fair) questionable reviews. At least GR's aren't way too high (IGN and their little Jade Empire love affair).

 

[TheNesMan]

This is an A f****** MINUS. This isn't a BAD GRADE.

Jesus.

Yes, it is a good grade. I just dislike how more than half of the review focused on the negative aspects of the game and it failed to mention what makes it so brilliant. I'm not terribly disappointed with the review and I see Jesse's point and I can accept that. It 's just another review where I feel GR has been hard on the game to keep its reputation and to isolate it from the other crowd of sites.

 

[vinkrukken]

The most of the other reviews were only about the greatness of the game, but this review pointed out the weak spots. I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

[Lentium]

Well, if you want to read about what makes the game great.. read the reviews for GTA3, VC & SA

Everyone already knew before it came out that it was going to rock-ass.
Might aswell point out the things other sites won't touch on (fear of fanboy retribution).

 

[BigZell2020]

This is an A f****** MINUS. This isn't a BAD GRADE.

Jesus.

Yes, it is a good grade. I just dislike how more than half of the review focused on the negative aspects of the game and it failed to mention what makes it so brilliant. I'm not terribly disappointed with the review and I see Jesse's point and I can accept that. It 's just another review where I feel GR has been hard on the game to keep its reputation and to isolate it from the other crowd of sites.

I think the point of skipping over some of the stuff that makes the game great was due to the fact that unless you have never played a GTA game (aka been living in a closet for 10 years), you already know what makes it great... it doesn't need to be stated. The review can only contain so much content, so why re-state what everyone knows?

I'll write a quick list incase anyone doesn't know what makes GTA IV great:

+Sandbox play
+Over the top parody
+Gripping storyline
+Moral Dilemmas/ Decision Making
- Which doesn't really affect anything

 

[vinkrukken]

Well, if you want to read about what makes the game great.. read the reviews for GTA3, VC & SA

Everyone already knew before it came out that it was going to rock-ass.
Might aswell point out the things other sites won't touch on (fear of fanboy retribution).

Thats exactly what i meant.

 

[petrucci]

I'm kinda confused about some review scores to be honest. I mean it doesn't really matter, but still. Like in the recent C&C review, I got the impression while reading it that GR finds "hardcore" or "competitive" gaming to be a bad thing. You can say it doesn't matter, since the "hardcore" or "competitive" gamers will buy it regardless of the review score, but what about all the rts casual (read:noob) players that won't pick up the game because it got a bad score. Those among them that might have realized how fun playing an RTS seriously can be will never have had a chance to do so. Anyways, this doesn't have anything to do with GTA4 so yes... Btw I found that gtaIV's improvements made up for it's shortcomings. And I mean, comparing it to other gta's, not just random games.

 

[Malari]

I think that in reading this review you have to keep in mind a few things:

1. The only console games that have sold more copies than GTA IV's predecessor (San Andreas) are GTA III, GTA: Vice City, Gran Turismo 3, and a few Super Mario games. Considering that the Mario and Gran Turismo games are Nintendo and Playstation exclusives, this is probably going to be the most anticipated game of the current generation (and since the industry has grown steadily, possibly of all time?).
2. Jesse's review is coming to us over a week after the first reviews, the lowest of which is a 98, as far as I know. It assumes you've heard the critical hype and read the reviews that refuse to factor in imperfections into their scores.
3. The more you like something, the more you want it to succeed, and the more disappointed you are when it doesn't deliver.

I agree with almost every positive and negative point in the review. I'm about 19 hours in, and it seems like so far, the game is just way too familiar. Not nostalgic... more like antiquated. It feels much more like Grand Theft Auto 3-2. And any innovation brings additional problems, as mentioned. I don't think Jesse even talks about the freezing that many people (myself included) experienced. (I own an 80 gb PS3 and had to stay offline to avoid lockups for three days.) Yesterday I had to try multiplayer at least 8 times before finally starting a race, which was cancelled about 4 seconds in, kicking you back out to the single player. Another three tries, and I finally got to do my first full multiplayer game, five days after buying the game.

The fact is, it's not hard to think of ways to make this game significantly better. After playing (and enjoying) EA's skate, I thought savable replays would be standard by now. Halo 3 does it, but no such luck here. I thought there would be more vehicles and mission types. Do they even have bicycles? I thought that this iteration would feature the best soundtrack. Nope. There are very few songs I recognize. Of Bob Marley's seven songs, I've heard just one before. It's like they had a really tight budget when it came to the licensing of the songs. I bet very few of them have ever been played a real live radio station.

I spent hours in previous games doing taxi missions, picking up sick people in the ambulance, putting out fires, and delivering pizzas on a moped. Now I can only do taxi missions, but I have to call Roman on my cellphone to get every single assignment. No fun.

On the other hand, watching TV and going to live shows is awesome, and I trust that the second half of the game will make me forget the first half. I enjoy the physics and the gunfights and the water/rain effects and the story. I love hearing the Spanish and the (sometimes mispronounced) Russian. But after reading Jesse's article, I thought for sure he'd give it a B+, and I would have agreed. I think A- is generous. And maybe by the end of this year we'll look back and wonder what all the fuss was about. Great game? Absolutely. A+, as so many have claimed? Not even close.

 

[Longo_2_guns]

I spent hours in previous games doing taxi missions, picking up sick people in the ambulance, putting out fires, and delivering pizzas on a moped.

You actually like doing all that menial shit? One of the things I'm glad for is they took most of that out, and made vigilante missions a lot better.

 

[Rekkie7]

The game is an amazing game, that said A- is an amazing score. I would of prob gone A but it's not like we're talking a B here.

I think it's the best game in the series, mostly for what they did improve. I find the gun shootouts to be a lot of fun, I don't know how we ever survived without a cover system. Sure it's not perfect, but it's an improvement.

As the review states, it's a game you should be playing.

 

[Joe_Dodson]

It was fun to read, but it's hard to reconcile the final image of an exposed cock and balls with an A-.

You aren't crazy if this review bothers you. It's uneven. There's an entire paragraph dedicated to how Jesse views himself as a reviewer, and yet the story only got one line. The main character isn't even named.

But where most reviewers just opened their mouths and closed their eyes, Jesse wrestled with that naked emperor. Who can blame him if his dick was showing, too?

 

[Padain]

Get over it. That is all.

 

[HK-47]

Thank you for fighting the power of A+ and 100%.
And I enjoyed the review.

 

[-FCM-]

This is an A f****** MINUS. This isn't a BAD GRADE.

Jesus.

Yes, it is a good grade. I just dislike how more than half of the review focused on the negative aspects of the game and it failed to mention what makes it so brilliant. I'm not terribly disappointed with the review and I see Jesse's point and I can accept that. It 's just another review where I feel GR has been hard on the game to keep its reputation and to isolate it from the other crowd of sites.

I think the point of skipping over some of the stuff that makes the game great was due to the fact that unless you have never played a GTA game (aka been living in a closet for 10 years), you already know what makes it great... it doesn't need to be stated. The review can only contain so much content, so why re-state what everyone knows?

I'll write a quick list incase anyone doesn't know what makes GTA IV great:

+Sandbox play
+Over the top parody
+Gripping storyline
+Moral Dilemmas/ Decision Making
- Which doesn't really affect anything

You can't say that because it's not true and it's not fair. Have you played it?

And with all due respect I don't think the review will age well. As unimportant as that seems I think it's sort of telling.

 

[maca2kx]

Well, if you want to read about what makes the game great.. read the reviews for GTA3, VC & SA

Everyone already knew before it came out that it was going to rock-ass.
Might aswell point out the things other sites won't touch on (fear of fanboy retribution).

It's hardly a good review if it has to be taken alongside those that came before it to be considered balanced. Although I agree that the negatives had to be said (and probably haven't in most reviews) they're all of the review, only a couple of paragraphs are actually about the positive elements of the game. Most of the review is a ream of negative points interspersed between setting up the emperor analogy. A review shouldn't rely on the work of others (on other sites) to provide a balanced look.

I thought that this iteration would feature the best soundtrack. Nope. There are very few songs I recognize. Of Bob Marley's seven songs, I've heard just one before. It's like they had a really tight budget when it came to the licensing of the songs. I bet very few of them have ever been played a real live radio station.

That was the point, it's nice to hear songs we know but their intention was to provide songs we may not be familiar with, it doesn't indicate a low budget at all.

Sam

 

[-FCM-]

Yeah, they got some really good songs for this game. If you base the quality of music on how much it would cost to license I can't imagine you're a very happy listener.

 

[MikeyVassallo]

It was fun to read, but it's hard to reconcile the final image of an exposed c*** and balls with an A-.

You aren't crazy if this review bothers you. It's uneven. There's an entire paragraph dedicated to how Jesse views himself as a reviewer, and yet the story only got one line. The main character isn't even named.

But where most reviewers just opened their mouths and closed their eyes, Jesse wrestled with that naked emperor. Who can blame him if his dick was showing, too?

Where is YOUR review Joe???? HUMMMMMMM?

 

[BigZell2020]

Have you played it?

Nooooo, I just read the instruction manual and came up with these ideas of how the game plays...

I have 23 hours of single player and am coming up on 15 hours of multiplayer.

 

[JP_Hurh]

I agree with the review and the grade. I think it was overly negative because when the numerical score is so overly fetishized (as it is in game reviews) anything less than a 100 would come under fire.

I didn't have as big a problem with the framerate stuff as Jesse did, but I agree that the whole game just feels somehow deader and more confined. The whole "living, breathing" world argument seems to forget that in a real world, one could go into buildings. I'm a little embarassed to say that I spent a lot of my first few hours in the game trying to find the shopping district (you know, so I could be fly for my dates) on the first island before finding out THERE WASN'T ONE.

And the mission-based format hasn't been improved at all. How many times do you finish a mission only to drive or cab back to the start of another one? And how many missions are basically, chase that car, kill somebody?

The game is good, but somebody needed to give Rockstar a little shove. Thanks Jesse.