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

[Rekkie7]

More like PC gamers have been pricks to developers, there is an insane amount of PC priacy is insane. There are a lot of moded consoles out there but in now where near the same numbers.

Consoles are so much easier for developers, with just one set of hardware...or even just 2 or 3 if your going multiconsole compared to the countless combinations for PC.

PC gaming is dying, and there's not much that will stop it.

 

[Yokiro]

Kids are so cute when they're on the floor, flailing their arms and complaining about the world not being fair.
Then you kick them, and they realize it could be worse.

I am obviously in the "Who cares?" camp, but I did like the review for what it was, even if it wasn't balanced (and it wasn't really supposed to be, because a line such as go out and buy it counts for a few more paragraphs of reasoned love for it), because at times, both a number of my friends and myself found the game flawed and irritating but loveable enough to come back to and continue killing folk eventually.
It'll be one that you look back on fondly in time (unless you hold insane hate grudges against video games) but isn't perfect, so, wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

 

[maca2kx]

I like nitpicky; if the review doesn't nitpick, then it might make me run out and buy a good game that lacks a key feature (like Sins of a solar empire's lack of a single player campaign/story). Doesn't make it less of a good game, but it's not suited to my tastes, nor someone else.

Lacking a single player is a bit different to a clumsy multiplayer interface.

Sam

 

[Eyebrowsbv31]

I like nitpicky; if the review doesn't nitpick, then it might make me run out and buy a good game that lacks a key feature (like Sins of a solar empire's lack of a single player campaign/story). Doesn't make it less of a good game, but it's not suited to my tastes, nor someone else.

Lacking a single player is a bit different to a clumsy multiplayer interface.

Sam

True, but Sins still got a good review because it still has a lot of content in it. I'm just defending the nitpickiness; it's necessary in reviews. As I said in a previous post, maybe there should have been more positive paragraphs instead of a few sentences about how great the game is.

On the matter of PC gamers: we're not all pirating pricks. I'll admit that I did pirate GTA3, but it was because I was unable to buy it at the local stores (underage). I had a friend go and get it for me with my own money later on (05/22/02, box is on my wall 'o boxes with the tag). I've pirated few other games after that, but I always go out and buy it as soon as I have the money to do so.

Piracy is bad, but you shouldn't punish the whole group, and Rockstar could have released it on steam like they did with all there other games recently. It's a matter of pushing sales for consoles right now, as microsoft has all but abandoned Pc gamers, and sony isn't in the market. (Games For Windows was just a scam to get us to pay Xbox live fees and buy Vista).


Disclaimer: I just got off a overnight shift, so if there is a strange word in there, thats why. I can't see straight( i.e. I typed "publish" instead of "Punish" first time 'round)

 

[maca2kx]

I like nitpicky; if the review doesn't nitpick, then it might make me run out and buy a good game that lacks a key feature (like Sins of a solar empire's lack of a single player campaign/story). Doesn't make it less of a good game, but it's not suited to my tastes, nor someone else.

Lacking a single player is a bit different to a clumsy multiplayer interface.

Sam

True, but Sins still got a good review because it still has a lot of content in it. I'm just defending the nitpickiness; it's necessary in reviews. As I said in a previous post, maybe there should have been more positive paragraphs instead of a few sentences about how great the game is.

There's no maybe about it, reviews should obviously highlight the flaws and I'm not saying the review did that badly (it didn't, the flaws should have been pointed out). The problem is that a sentence saying "get this game" isn't sufficient to outweigh paragraphs of negatives. Would it be ok to write a review of positive paragraphs with a couple of sentences along the lines of "don't buy this game"?

Sam

 

[-FCM-]

Okay, now I'm starting to get the feeling people are jumping on the GTAIV hate wagon. I've been playing the game for a good 10 hours and I'm still discovering new animations and behaviors courtesy of Rockstar's incredible attention to detail. The arguments being brought up are incredibly nitpicky. Comparing GTAIV to GTAIII is a little silly to me because GTAIV makes GTAIII look like a hollowed out s***.

But at the time GTAIII was revolutionary. Of course the new game makes the old game look crappy. I like nitpicky; if the review doesn't nitpick, then it might make me run out and buy a good game that lacks a key feature (like Sins of a solar empire's lack of a single player campaign/story). Doesn't make it less of a good game, but it's not suited to my tastes, nor someone else.

Also, you're going to see newer and newer animations everyday because that's how the physics engine works which wasn't made by rockstar just incorporated by rockstar. So that "attention to detail' award doesn't go to rockstar.

The fact that Rockstar and LucasArts(the forced unleashed) are using that engine and shafting the PC gamers (again) is another little nibble though, I'd knock it down to a B+ just for that being lucasarts and Rockstar started on the PC and continue to be pricks to us.

Vice City also got an A, and to say that the shift from GTAIII to Vice City was bigger than the shift from San Andreas to GTAIV seems a little silly. If ever there was a case of "more of the same", in my opinion, it was Vice City. The whole taking over businesses thing, I mean...whatever. Features like that are tacked on to thousands of games, but all of the sudden when it's tacked on to a GTA game it's genius. I'm just disappointed that Rockstar finally focused on the things that mattered and got dinged for it.

 

[Rekkie7]

Well from San Andreas to IV things we're also brought back, I think it's hard from a reviewers standpoint to not bring em down for removing features. Most of which are likely going to find their way back into the game in the next installment.

 

[madster111]

Also, you're going to see newer and newer animations everyday because that's how the physics engine works which wasn't made by rockstar just incorporated by rockstar. So that "attention to detail' award doesn't go to rockstar.

have you never used a basic physics engine?
they look like absolute crap, and do the most basic of things.

if you can customise a physics engine to way rockstar has done, i will stab myself with a fork covered in salt.

of course they get the attention to detail award, especially on most of the 'eye level' textures, which might i ad, they made.

 

[Eyebrowsbv31]

Also, you're going to see newer and newer animations everyday because that's how the physics engine works which wasn't made by rockstar just incorporated by rockstar. So that "attention to detail' award doesn't go to rockstar.

have you never used a basic physics engine?
they look like absolute crap, and do the most basic of things.

if you can customise a physics engine to way rockstar has done, i will stab myself with a fork covered in salt.

of course they get the attention to detail award, especially on most of the 'eye level' textures, which might i ad, they made.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0yvs6RJVVY

As I was saying, Rockstar didn't make the physics engine, and customizing it isn't exactly hard as Lucas arts is doing it too. Get the salty fork ready.

 

[LinksOcarina]

Okay, now I'm starting to get the feeling people are jumping on the GTAIV hate wagon. I've been playing the game for a good 10 hours and I'm still discovering new animations and behaviors courtesy of Rockstar's incredible attention to detail. The arguments being brought up are incredibly nitpicky. Comparing GTAIV to GTAIII is a little silly to me because GTAIV makes GTAIII look like a hollowed out s***.

But at the time GTAIII was revolutionary. Of course the new game makes the old game look crappy. I like nitpicky; if the review doesn't nitpick, then it might make me run out and buy a good game that lacks a key feature (like Sins of a solar empire's lack of a single player campaign/story). Doesn't make it less of a good game, but it's not suited to my tastes, nor someone else.

Also, you're going to see newer and newer animations everyday because that's how the physics engine works which wasn't made by rockstar just incorporated by rockstar. So that "attention to detail' award doesn't go to rockstar.

The fact that Rockstar and LucasArts(the forced unleashed) are using that engine and shafting the PC gamers (again) is another little nibble though, I'd knock it down to a B+ just for that being lucasarts and Rockstar started on the PC and continue to be pricks to us.

Vice City also got an A, and to say that the shift from GTAIII to Vice City was bigger than the shift from San Andreas to GTAIV seems a little silly. If ever there was a case of "more of the same", in my opinion, it was Vice City. The whole taking over businesses thing, I mean...whatever. Features like that are tacked on to thousands of games, but all of the sudden when it's tacked on to a GTA game it's genius. I'm just disappointed that Rockstar finally focused on the things that mattered and got dinged for it.

But Vice City also had a intricate plot next to it. Unlike GTA III, it seemed like a series of unfortanate events that were strung along for Claude Speed to tackle for no real reason what so ever. THAT was a major difference in the end.

 

[Eyebrowsbv31]

Okay, now I'm starting to get the feeling people are jumping on the GTAIV hate wagon. I've been playing the game for a good 10 hours and I'm still discovering new animations and behaviors courtesy of Rockstar's incredible attention to detail. The arguments being brought up are incredibly nitpicky. Comparing GTAIV to GTAIII is a little silly to me because GTAIV makes GTAIII look like a hollowed out s***.

But at the time GTAIII was revolutionary. Of course the new game makes the old game look crappy. I like nitpicky; if the review doesn't nitpick, then it might make me run out and buy a good game that lacks a key feature (like Sins of a solar empire's lack of a single player campaign/story). Doesn't make it less of a good game, but it's not suited to my tastes, nor someone else.

Also, you're going to see newer and newer animations everyday because that's how the physics engine works which wasn't made by rockstar just incorporated by rockstar. So that "attention to detail' award doesn't go to rockstar.

The fact that Rockstar and LucasArts(the forced unleashed) are using that engine and shafting the PC gamers (again) is another little nibble though, I'd knock it down to a B+ just for that being lucasarts and Rockstar started on the PC and continue to be pricks to us.

Vice City also got an A, and to say that the shift from GTAIII to Vice City was bigger than the shift from San Andreas to GTAIV seems a little silly. If ever there was a case of "more of the same", in my opinion, it was Vice City. The whole taking over businesses thing, I mean...whatever. Features like that are tacked on to thousands of games, but all of the sudden when it's tacked on to a GTA game it's genius. I'm just disappointed that Rockstar finally focused on the things that mattered and got dinged for it.

But Vice City also had a intricate plot next to it. Unlike GTA III, it seemed like a series of unfortanate events that were strung along for Claude Speed to tackle for no real reason what so ever. THAT was a major difference in the end.

Not to mention it was the end of the silent protagonist and featured excellent voice acting, good humor, and was just plain fun.

 

[MikeyVassallo]

I love GTA4, but VC has my favorite look and feel.

 

[Eyebrowsbv31]

I love GTA4, but VC has my favorite look and feel.

Amen.

 

[-FCM-]

And GTA IV is, in my opinion, the first game in which the environment feels almost completely and totally realistic, teeming with life, and behaving like an actual city. Not first in the series. First in the industry. That's just my opinion. But it's just as arguable as a story/look/feel preference, and the whole idea of what is or isn't revolutionary is a little too liquid to decide what is deserving of an A and what isn't, in my opinion.

But again, my problem isn't with the grade. It's how the review was structured that made the whole thing, including the final grade, feel a bit like a user review or a manifesto. I would have been fine had a more straightforward review been put up with a companion manifesto.

 

[TheNesMan]

I love GTA4, but VC has my favorite look and feel.

I'm not sure which one I like more but I have to agree that VC has a great look and feel. Every game has a different look though which I like.

 

[dUKE]

as far as a coherent (and awesome) style, vice city was the best in my opinion. but that's in no small part because i grew up watching miami vice and knew all the music.

gta 4 is very good (i was playing all weekend) but it's the first in the series to actually scale back on what was offered. and i'm not just talking about the size of the map. the story is great, but you no longer have any personal stats like san andreas, and little in the way of any influence over niko other than his clothes.

 

[used44]

My brother was complaining about a similar thing. He said that the game actually offers less, in terms of character attributes, and even things like parachuting and jet flying, RC car racing.

But, really, it all makes sense in the reality of the game. If, in this realistic world, you drive your motorcycle onto the tarmac of a major airport, then some major shit is gonna go down. So alot, of the silly missions are gone, but maybe it wan't so bad of a move. All of those things would have been a detrement to the feel of GTA IV, which we can all agree is a different sort of feel than the GTA III, VC, SA games.

 

[Jesse_Costantino]

A week after writing my review, I've noticed a few things overall:

1) As I said in my review, the game is an impressive collection of new details, but it's ultimately less of a game overall compared to its predecessors. It's a fantastic game, but it's not meeting its potential--to the point of frustration.

2) I don't feel compelled to keep playing after I finished all the main missions. I put more time into Vice City and San Andreas after I finished the missions than I did playing through the missions themselves. Not so here. I'm at about 50hrs of total play time and I don't feel the need to keep playing. In comparison, I put in close to 80 or 90 hours in both Vice City and San Andreas, and maybe just under that in GTA III. The later missions in GTA IV are absolutely incredible, but there's very little to do once you're done.

3) The NPC AI is too sensible. They don't behave as erratically or interestingly as in prior GTAs. You can't just stand on a street corner and watch crazy shit happen like you could in Vice City and San Andreas. All the NPCs are just too civil, sensible, and predictable for anything unexpected to unfold. Unanticipated chaos has always been the heart and soul of the series.

My negativity isn't because I think it's a bad game, and it's not because I think it doesn't meet expectations (which I don't think it does), but rather it's because GTA IV doesn't meet its potential and because Liberty City is now a slightly less fun place to be.

Indulge my egotism a bit while I quote myself: "These long-standing issues are like an untreated STD that was easier to ignore when the series was young and fresh and nubile, but now that the series has slowed down a bit by scaling back its scope and by returning to an old haunt (Liberty City), it’s hard not to think about that festering, scratch-inducing rash."

That sums up my feelings perfectly. An STD doesn't make anyone less beautiful or intelligent or soulful; but it is an annoyance and a real shame.

 

[-FCM-]

Fair enough. An opinion's an opinion, and I can't knock a guy with a homestar icon. And I like my GR to err on the side over over-criticism. You know what the say. Better 10 innocent games die than 1 guilty one go free. Or something like that.

 

[GhostTrip]

GTAIV?

I'll wait for GTA China Town.