Xbox 360
Will people finally admit R* is overrated if GTA5 includes....
- Back To:
- Board List
- Topic List
- Topic Archived
Xeroxicide posted...
Really? Max Payne 3 had lackluster controls compared to the Remedy originals, Max was far too slow for the need of the game and the game favored shooting from cover way too much (including the fact that you got Bullet time from being shot at in cover). Their combat mechanics are noticeably worse than their competitors in the TPS market. I'd simply wish that they'd spend a bit less on presentation and more on the gameplay. Max Payne 3 makes it quite clear that they will not pull any stops with the presentation, but how they managed to screw up the pacing and controls that badly is a good question. --- Poet Eliot had it all wrong.... | |
To people who don't understand cheating races, it's the same as rubber banding in a racer, you can't get first position no matter how well you drive until the game says you can. R* does this in loads of missions becauase they are scripted. You can't blow up a car no matter how many rockets you fire at it because it needs to reach a certain point to trigger another scene. I remember just getting mission failed screens if shooting tracked vehicles though. The biker chases in the GTA IV DLC had tons of rubber banding. --- [1:04pm] <R33P3R> how can a game be epic on a phone? | |
lol @ TC | |
It's funny because I have loved every single GTA since 3 (played the old top down ones and was not crazy about those) Also loved red dead redemption..though only single player. I still have relative faith in rockstar. more so when compared to some other companies. --- none | |
From: Halo_Forever | #091 Xeroxicide posted... After a while the gameplay kind of clicked with me. At first they seemed really sluggish but I think they were designed with that in mind. I still prefer the older style where it was buttery smooth, but MP3s was an interesting take, and i wouldnt consider the controls bad, just different. --- balls | |
Vegeta1000 posted... It's bad because SA's core gameplay is good / better than VC's but its narrative and characters let it down as far as having a broad appeal. That whole 'ghetto thug made it big' cliché is something only Americans can relate to and it's usually not the bourgeoisie or elite (or non blacks) that make up the numbers in this demographic. If VC had the choice of an Afro-American protagonist, there wouldn't even be an argument about which GTA is the best relative to era and hardware. | |
It's bad because SA's core gameplay is good / better than VC's but its narrative and characters let it down as far as having a broad appeal. That whole 'ghetto thug made it big' cliché is something only Americans can relate to and it's usually not the bourgeoisie or elite (or non blacks) that make up the numbers in this demographic. Have you made it out of Los Santos? For the 1000/th time, the ghettoness disappears after you leave. Also, why do you care if the game only relates to Americans? Why should it have to relate to the rest of the world? Most of GTA's sales come from America anyway. R* wanted to do something different. SA fis the whole early 90s era perfectly just like VC perfectly fits the early 80s feel. --- IT'S ME AUSTIN!!!!! | |
DRzCalderon posted... As for the topic first of all, L.A.Noire wasn't developed by ROCKSTAR. They are the PUBLISHER. The same thing they did with Max Payne 1&2. L.A Noire also did not run on Rockstar's RAGE engine nor did it implement the Euphoria engine. So it shouldn't be considered a true Rockstar game.oh and I loved GTA4 in my opinion. Actually, it was reported shortly after the game was released that Rockstar did have a rather big hand in development later in the process. From making design decisions to providing programming, animation, artists, QA support, and more, Rockstar was there providing that. L.A. Noire was not their idea, it was not their product initially, but they had a big hand in the programming and finishing of it. | |
creep50 posted... ARsignal11 posted...I think I'm the only person here who hasn't played a Rockstar game this generation. Well, no...scratch that, I did play LA Noire. But that was developed by Team Bondi (despite how they advertised the game), so I personally don't include that in their repertoire. "Laterally," huh? RDR has a regen health system which is no different than any other game with regen health. What makes RDR's so bad? I already know you're not going to respond, because you're just trying to get people riled up by making no sense. --- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIbu3wJDmVQ - New gaming series My podcast: hulkshare.com/inferiorminds | |
Perfect Light posted... creep50 posted...ARsignal11 posted...I think I'm the only person here who hasn't played a Rockstar game this generation. Well, no...scratch that, I did play LA Noire. But that was developed by Team Bondi (despite how they advertised the game), so I personally don't include that in their repertoire. you sure seems that you like to decide why people do or do not like something and to answer your question no...the regen health is far from being like the regen health from other games...the difference is that you literally have no way to know how much health you have left....there is a little sepia effect but how ´´dark´´ it gets is very random...so you never really know if you can take an extra bullet or not that alone makes it terrible..especially in a game like this --- San Andreas > > > > > > > > >Desert Bus > > > > > > > >GTA 4 |
- Back To:
- Board List
- Topic List
- Topic Archived
