What made GTA4 just not as playable as the others?

#61LordPonchoPosted 2/11/2013 11:46:42 AM
Objective, yes, deficiencies, no. Deficiencies is entirely subjective so stop flinging your opinion around like it's the only right one. You're starting to sound like creep, but with better grammar. And, as native said, 10 less missions. That's not much. And the missions seemed better in IV than SA to me. Nobody wants missions like "you just had to follow the damn train CJ!" Or any of OG Loc's missions.

As for the things we agreed are objective, I simply stated objective. Not deficiencies. Reading is hard, I understand. I can objectively say "IV didn't have planes." I can't objectively say "IV didn't have planes and therefore it's bad."

And your comparison is so far out of context that no rational person could follow it. They spent 4 years. It was not a minimal effort. A minimal effort would turn out to be a widely panned game. IV was not such a thing.
---
"lol der was a shdow on my carpet but ti looked like a stane and tried to clen it up but ti was a shadoow" -Ghost4800
#62A_Long_DecemberPosted 2/11/2013 12:25:29 PM
GTA SA had two missions where you just had to press the right button on time, catch someone an drive them to the hospital, drive up and down with a man attached to your bonnet. Those things are all boring. If that's variety I'll stick with monotony.
#63hellfire582Posted 2/11/2013 1:52:16 PM
LordPoncho posted...
Objective, yes, deficiencies, no. Deficiencies is entirely subjective so stop flinging your opinion around like it's the only right one. You're starting to sound like creep, but with better grammar. And, as native said, 10 less missions. That's not much. And the missions seemed better in IV than SA to me. Nobody wants missions like "you just had to follow the damn train CJ!" Or any of OG Loc's missions.

As for the things we agreed are objective, I simply stated objective. Not deficiencies. Reading is hard, I understand. I can objectively say "IV didn't have planes." I can't objectively say "IV didn't have planes and therefore it's bad."

And your comparison is so far out of context that no rational person could follow it. They spent 4 years. It was not a minimal effort. A minimal effort would turn out to be a widely panned game. IV was not such a thing.


"But those aren't objective deficiencies, as you call them. Yes, smaller map is, yes, no planes is. Deficiencies? No. Everything else you said is subjective to the point that it really is just not what you wanted."

I think any reasonable person reading that would agree that it's not clear whether you're agreeing that the map and planes are merely objective or are objective deficiencies. Writing is hard, I understand. Anyway, it was a simple misunderstanding. No need to insult people over it.

Also, the word deficiency doesn't necessarily mean you're saying it's bad, it just means that something is not there. You could say that planes are deficient in GTA IV, and you thought that was a good thing. That's why I assumes you were probably agreeing with me that the lack of planes and map size could be called objective deficiencies.

Finally, I my comparison is in no way irrational. Yes, I realize that R* spent 4 years developing this new engine. They could've spent 20 years developing a new engine, but since it still lacked a lot of important features from SA, I would still say their effort was subpar. I understand that that is my opinion and I don't mean to state it as a fact, but to say it's completely irrational is just wrong.
#64DruffPosted 2/11/2013 2:15:21 PM
dafreestyleking posted...
I'll have to disagree with you. One of my favorite things to do in the older GTA games was punch pedestrians and try to get them to chase me, which would lead to 2 stars at most, but usually the rating disappeared on it's on. But in IV, doing this can result in a 5 star wanted level. It's ridiculous that just punching people can cause the FBI to come after me.

And I didn't notice the cops spawning out of control in SA like they did in IV. I've even seen cops spawn behind me when I was shooting them running through the door in my safe house.


I've played GTA 4 a stupid number of times, and I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. These things you describe simply never happen. If you assault a pedestrian, you get one star at most. Even if you shoot them. Killing a ped might get you two stars, if you do right in front of a cop. The only way to get three stars and up is by killing police officers.

So either your copy of the game is defective (doubtful,) or your memory is defective (much more likely,) or you're just flat out lying (#1 favorite pastime of many internet forum users for some reason.)
---
Caution - You are approaching the periphery shield of Vortex Four
#65VG_SoldierPosted 2/11/2013 2:22:32 PM
From time to time, I still play GTA IV. Granted, I never played SA, but I'll never understand why people don't recognize GTA IV as on of the premier games of this generation of software. Sure, it wasn't perfect and that's one of the reasons I enjoyed TBoGT so much and why I'm so looking forward to GTA V.
---
If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him. ---
In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace.
#66dafreestylekingPosted 2/11/2013 3:37:59 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#67DruffPosted 2/11/2013 4:27:44 PM(edited)
dafreestyleking posted...
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. If you kill peds and stay in the wanted area of the map, eventually your wanted level will increase if the cops cannot catch you. I've done it plenty of times, and I've had the game for years, so don't tell me I'm lying blah blah blah blah blah blah.


Sorry friendo, but no. In GTA 4 the wanted level does not increase unless you kill cops or maybe if you cause a lot of mayhem, i.e. using grenades and rockets to blow s*** up. Just punching pedestrians isn't going to make it go beyond one or two stars. Period. If you have one star and continually elude the cops inside the wanted area, it will eventually automatically go to two stars... but that's as high as it will go, unless you kill cops. In short, you're full of it.
---
Caution - You are approaching the periphery shield of Vortex Four
#68Offworlder1Posted 2/11/2013 4:22:59 PM
"From time to time, I still play GTA IV. Granted, I never played SA, but I'll never understand why people don't recognize GTA IV as on of the premier games of this generation of software. Sure, it wasn't perfect and that's one of the reasons I enjoyed TBoGT so much and why I'm so looking forward to GTA V."


If you never played GTA:SA then you don't know what people miss and why a lot of people feel GTA IV was not good enough after such an epic game like GTA:SA, they did ok with GTA IV but they removed so much customization, variety, and humor that was loved in the older game. If you played GTA:SA you'd see the area variety as it was not endless city which was really dull in GTA IV, in GTA:SA you had city, country, desert, and hillside. Car customization, more clothing variety, hair styles, and the ability to learn 3 fighting styles were great new additions in GTA:SA which people LOVED but were gone in GTA IV.

GTA:SA also has 3 full cities being Los Santos, San Fierro, and Las Venturas not to mention the map itself was bigger but it was a big map with variety. GTA IV's map is smaller and has less variety, they could have used Alderney as a different kind of area being more sub urban, country, or have a forest so it was something different then the city.
---
"Always two there are, a master and an apprentice"
#69KarpWhipPosted 2/11/2013 4:30:34 PM
VG_Soldier posted...
From time to time, I still play GTA IV. Granted, I never played SA, but I'll never understand why people don't recognize GTA IV as on of the premier games of this generation of software. Sure, it wasn't perfect and that's one of the reasons I enjoyed TBoGT so much and why I'm so looking forward to GTA V.


You should definitely play San Andreas man. If only just so you can see just how overrated it is by its hardcore fanboys.

Seriously though, SA is awesome. Overrated as hell, but still awesome.
---
"METAL RULES AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT: DIE." Paul Baloff
#70Offworlder1Posted 2/11/2013 4:35:11 PM
GTA:SA is not over rated, like GTA:VC it improved and raised the bar on what GTA fans expect from a new GTA game. People love GTA:VC and GTA:SA so much for good reason, the gameplay, soundtracks, and content were abundant in those two games. GTA III is one of the best foundation games that was built on and improved so much evident with GTA:VC and GTA:SA.
---
"Always two there are, a master and an apprentice"