SR2 was fun, but I wasn't interested in playing it through a second time versus the 3 times I played through SA.
In regards to SA vs V, this is a tough call.
I'm really enjoying the online play, but since I've completed the SP mode, I haven't had the urge to go back, except to check out some of the oddities and myths I've been reading about.
I think V is probably the better game overall, but I really liked SA and there are things in SA I really wish were included in V
- San Fierro and Las Venturas: The V map is pretty good, but there is a lot of wasted space between the mountains and underwater detail. These areas just don't get used much. Including the other 2 cities (and maybe growing the map) would have been awesome and definitely gotten more use.
- Working Casino: Still hoping this happens as DLC
- Flame Throwers: I can't believe this wasn't included. Maybe in DLC?
I could keep going, but you can see I just miss some of the stuff from SA. When V was first announced as the return to San Andreas, I was really hoping for the return of all 3 cities. I'm still loving V, but they really need to release some SP DLC already --- You never had a rope around your neck. Well, I'm going to tell you something. When that rope starts to pull tight, you can feel the Devil bite your ass.
I definitely understand not being able to go back after V, having tried to do so myself. I played the hell out of SA back in the day, but V is just this whole other thing that makes it impossible to look at SA the same way. --- "Anyway, I only do molly now. It's really a health food."
GTA V is way more fun and possibly the best game in the series. GTA San Andreas is highly overrated. The first time I played 3 and Vice City, I was amazed. They were fun games. So when I heard SA was coming out, I preordered it and got it launch week. When I actually got to play it, I was greatly disappointed. San Andreas is one of my least favorite games in the series.
I have the same taste as this guy --- GT: Amish Assassin8