I don't understand the appeal of older GTA games

>>382780641
>I will shamefully admit that, yes, I played IV and V before I played any of the other ones.

You said it in your first sentence. You didn't play them as a kid, therefore have no nostalgia for them. They are not exactly good games by today's standards.

Most pepole like them mainly because of the music and setting. Also the open world and story telling were GOAT back in the day.

>>382780641
>The shooting feels so stiff and imprecise.
try ducking. makes it 1000% more precise

>Losing all of your weapons every time you die is unbelievably tedious.
>not safehousing near a weapon spawn for infinite guns and ammo

>I would argue that 90% of these games are about fumbling with the awkward controls.
after you get used to them they aren't too awkward.

>>382780758
If those aren't good games by today's standards, then it's the problem of standards and not the games themselves.

forklift mission is easy as fuck your retarded

I played the first 2 and never liked them, then 3, Vice City and San Andreas and couldn't get into them either, I played them when they came out.

"But anon, why did you buy the games if you never liked the series?"

I didn't buy any, friends, and cousins had them, then I played 4 and finished it, when 5 came out on pc I liked it even more.

Didn't the PS2 versions have lock on targeting? Did that make it easier or harder?

>>382780641
>not playing only the first 2 games
pleb

File: 888.jpg (51KB, 600x641px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x641px

>>382780996
Welcome to getting old. This feeling never stops.

>>382780641
as you say, it sounds like you're just too casual
>awkward controls
plug in a controller or spend 5 minutes rebinding
most missions give you plenty of time to react to "surprise objectives"

>>382780641
Underage-fag detected

>>382780641
I haven't played 5, but the mission variety in 4 was absolutely fucking awful in comparison to all the other games. While the previous games would always introduce a fun gimick in practically every mission and make you do all sorts of interesting shit while tying it neatly into the story, the entirety of 4 was just "srive to spot A, play gears of war a bit, then drive to spot B to finish the mission". Before that I never even imagined that a Grand Theft Auto game could ever possibly bore me this much.

Not to mention the map itself was utter garbage. The previous games had the benefit of having smaller maps, meaning you could load them with many unique locations that made the entire world memorable. 4 was larger and had to be filled up with blocks of same looking nothingness for ridiculous stretches.

There's also the loss of the upbeat, lighthearted satire that the other games had going on in exchange for a much drearier, colourless environment, which meshed really well with just how fucking boring the world, characters, and missions were.

From what I gather 5 fixed the last bit and to a certain extent (though not much) the mission variety, but I'm still not impressed honestly.

>>382781952
Also
>And almost every mission surprises you with further objectives than you are expecting. Let's say you are in a shootout, then suddenly a message will say "He's getting away, go after him QUICK!" Before you even realize what is happening the mission is over and you have to do it all over again. These endless amounts of "surprise!" objectives in missions quickly gets extremely irritating. And I feel that, in general, you can only do really well at these missions if you can plan them out beforehand; just going in blind often doesn't tend to work well.
Sounds to me like you're just really shit at video games and can't handle them throwing something fun and challenging at you.

>>382780641
I agree with most of what you said, and I started out with the 3D GTAs. I'll add that with VC in particular, the fact that Tommy ran so fast made everything feel so trivial and downright easy at times; I felt like there was no reason to use the cars when I could just run everywhere. I only really stole one when I was running from the cops and was in front of a Pay 'N Spray. San Andreas was a little better with this.

What I will say is that the appeal of the older GTAs is that not only did they feel more game-y, you also had many ways of tackling a mission since the objectives were so simple, for the most part, but also they really made you feel like you were being rewarded for the things you do in the world. Sure, some of the side activities played the same way, but all the side activities had an immediately obvious reason to do them and all of the rewards aided your gameplay in the free roam in some way. I like IV and V, but what they really lack are these two things. IV is a little better with the first thing since it's less railroaded than V, but both don't really have meaningful rewards for the things you do in them. Compare the 100% rewards in SA and IV for example. You not only get the infinite ammo reward for IV when you 100% San Andreas, but you also get $1,000,000, a Hydra, a Rhino, and a BMX. The infinite ammo in IV is pointless as well; it resets after you turn the game off. Furthermore, iirc, you get an Annihilator, but it was already incredibly easy to steal one. V's reward is even worse; it's just a T-shirt and an extra mission.

Also, the older GTAs, since they're older, can use music for their radio stations that are deemed as classics, and the choices of music in those games are no-brainers. That's why people say they're more memorable. By the time IV and V came around, you couldn't really use those well-known songs on all the radio stations like in VC and SA, and you had to diversify.

I don't know what kind of shit flinging casual spastic do you need to be if you can't get into VC and SA.

Industry crash when?

>>382780641
please be bait

Not exactly surprising considering at the time great open world games could be counted on one hand. The games appeal was the combination of graphics, scope, and music that combined created an incredibly consistent and engrossing thematic experience. I used to spend so much time driving around the back roads in the mountain area, getting caught in the rain and following traffic laws while listening to the talk radio station. The missions themselves were almost besides the point really, they were never much more than drive here, shoot that, what have you. They were really good at slowly building up and exposing you to the world though. The pacing of San Andreas is fantastic, you literally start off on some crappy bike and spend the first few hours shitting around ghetos before you start building towards better cars and guns and it's not until halfway through or so you even have an airfield to start fucking with planes and helicopters. That game really made you feel like you built something out of nothing. Today though I can see why it wouldn't be as engaging as going straight for V. At this point the only thing San Andreas has on IV or V is the writing. San Andreas was the last time GTA didn't bother to take itself seriously before IV went overboard with "oscar" quality writing. The series hasn't been the same since really. Cheats went to crap and if memory serves V wouldn't even let you have a damn tank outside one tiny area. San Andreas may not stand the test of time but I certainly remember being infinity more engaged in its world than anything IV or V put forth. At this point I only play GTA to kill cops and start random violence.

>>382781952
>light-hearted satire
IV had plenty of that though; the main story was serious even though Brucie, Roman, and Bernie were flamboyant for the most part, but the radio station DJs and talk shows, the theatres, the TV shows, and the in-game internet, which most people tend to forget exists, all had that light-hearted satire in spades. You just had to spend a little more time finding it, as there are more sources for it. In the older GTAs, the satire in the overworld came from the radio stations and stuff you see in the world. In IV, it came from those plus the TV shows and the internet I just mentioned, plus don't forget the hangouts; the characters you hung out with, and especially the girlfriends, were all a parody of something in some way.

Also, I don't think the zany moments of the older GTAs were tied neatly into the story at all points; especially in the later half of SA, the zany stuff imo really started to feel forced, and didn't really feel possible with the character they were trying to portray. I am of the opinion that SA's story really loses track of itself in its later arcs, and personally, I'm a big fan of the gritty, low-key shootouts you describe, so I never found them boring- I really felt like just some seedy criminal hitman instead of some sort of Rambo, and the former is what GTA III was, which IV was the real sequel to; VC and SA were really just spin-offs.

>>382781952

Streamlining the missions in IV was the best decision they ever made. I hated all the gimmicky shit. The best mechanics are driving and shooting, so why not base most of the missions on driving and shooting? I really don't need to parachute or go in a submarine especially if they control like shit

>>382783060

Nobody wants to watch a tv show while playing a game. Having stupid crap play over the radio works because it's integrated into something you already spend most of your time doing, driving. The fake internet worked when it came to missions but beyond that I found it entirely pointless and uninteresting. IV and V take themselves way too seriously, especially for a game where you're encouraged to go around murdering random civilians and getting into car chases with the cops. To go from that to Niko whining about trying to escape violence or Michael bitching he just wanted to retire and relax is tonally deaf and well, dumb. They don't need to be Saint's Row or anything but I missed crazy shit like stealing a jetpack from a military base, codes that turned everyone into Elvis impersonators, and above all spawning a fucking tank wherever I wanted, why the fuck is that not a thing anymore? Christ Rockstar.

>>382783754

Because the focus of the GTA franchise was never about being crazy, it was about trying to let the player "do anything". From III to SA they gradually accomplished this more and more. With IV it was their biggest effort yet to make the game resemble a sort of Second Life simulation, with allowing you to hang out with friends and take taxis around instead of stealing cars. I would argue that Rockstar actually enjoys making these elements more than the criminal ones. But most people didn't like IV and thought it was too serious, so with V they went in the other direction and made it a lot sillier and exaggerated. But the main philosophy behind the GTA franchise was to always improve the interactive and sandbox nature of the game

Morons. GTA IV and especially GTA V are casualized shit for noobs without skill. Everything is dumbed down in GTA IV & GTA V, difficulty, mission variety, open world activites etc..

I don't know why anyone would bother with GTA when there's much better games like Saints Row out there.

>>382784687
>I don't know why anyone would bother with GTA when there's much better games like Saints Row out there.

The only good Saints Row games are 1 & 2. Don't kid yourself now, please.

>>382784471
>dumbed down difficulty
It's not nice to lie.

>>382783754
>Nobody wants to watch a tv show while playing a game though
I do, because I like GTA, the TV shows were a new feature at the time, and Rockstar is generally pretty good at providing backstory to the worlds they create, so I wanted to see how they furthered that ambition. I thought it was worth the time after the fact. Also, the internet wasn't pointless; it provides an in-game method of showing the locations of all the side content, weapons, and armor throughout the world, it was how you got the girlfriends, it was how you got prompts for some of the side missions and one of the friendships, and it provided a great deal of backstory for a lot of the characters. Like I said, you have to explore it, which I enjoyed, and you didn't, which is fine. But the purpose is there.

Also, you're missing something fundamental about both Niko and Michael. Niko is supposed to be a hypocrite, and said hypocrisy is a very prominent theme in the story, as you'll find out when you confront Darko. His penchant for violence is the reason why things end so badly for him, and it's entirely his own fault. He was never averse to violence, especially if it meant protecting or helping out those he cares about, and that's why he does the things he does in the story. He's not sad about having to kill specifically, he's sad because he feels like killing for so long has made him lose any hope, happiness and ambition he had in his life, and he has no idea how to get those things back. Michael says he wants to retire, but actually, he loves the criminal lifestyle and he wants it back. He always did. He sees them as the glory days of his youth; that's why he talks about them so loftily with Dr Friedlander. It was only a matter of time until he slipped back into the lifestyle, and the jewelry store heist was the perfect chance for him to do so.

For me, I don't like being distracted from driving by having to pay attention to the talk radio; I prefer music. I'll give you cheats though.

>>382784953
I'm ashamed to share a board with such casuals. GTA V was so fucking handholding, "drive here to complete mission" shit

>>382780641
>I don't understand the appeal of older GTA games because I'm a 15 year old shitter

>>382785174
Oppose to literal drive here to complete mission in older games? Can you name one hard mission that doesn't involve driving and flying.

>>382782139
>Industry crash when?
Right after the purge

>>382780641
>Losing all of your weapons every time you die is unbelievably tedious

that's why you never play old gta games without cheats, fucker.

>>382786169
Congrats on being even shittier than the op

>>382780641
I played and beat VC and SA for the first times recently and it sounds like you're just bad

Test

File: 32145366576.jpg (21KB, 200x283px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 200x283px

>>382780641
>not liking san andreas

Straight busta

>>382786169
At that point you might as well just save scum fuckboy

>>382780641
If you don't play a videogame when it's relatively new then you're pretty much guaranteed not to like it.
Those who say the previous older titles are awesome have a feeling of nostalgia when playing old game while new players playing the old games can see how horribly it stands up to current games.

>>382786041
At least in the older games, they made it challenging. Like in that GTA SA mission where you have to chase jeffrey on a bike at top speed, if you clip one wall the mission was failed.

Also that mission where you have to drive cesar's car to the other side of the fucking map and it's a lowrider so it's super easy to flip over and impossible to flip it back on it's wheels.

>>382786254
>>382786452

get a room you faggots.
gta games aren't fun without cheats, without cheats they are just bad 3rd person shooters with somewhat interesting characters and story.

>>382786630
probably cause you're always dying or getting busted fag

>>382786630
if you cheat in GTA SA you literally won't be able to complete the story. A couple of parts will gegt bugged (that dude jumping off the roof, and kinkslut's card key won't appear)

I like to finish my games

>>382786806

nah, i just like jumpjets...

>>382786831
i had no problems with sa when i played it the first time.

>>382786630

im convined that 50% of the people or more, who lavish old GTA, played it witth guns/ammo cheats. Always having to replinish more when you die is so fucking boring

>>382786831
That's only if you put in cheats way too much, think the number is like 500 cheats or so. I put in health/weapon cheats every so often during my first playthrough many years ago and I had no trouble saving Madd Dogg

Wish GTA games had a style and aesthetic again, instead of "Real Life".

>>382781201

>>382780641
Welp yes compared to newer and more ADVANCED versions of the same game, the older games are not as fun. It doesnt take a rocket surgeon to figure that one out. Thats like saying you didnt like TEKKEN 2 because its nothing like TEKKEN 7. No shit.

They are still good games. Solid stories, interesting characters and missions, incredible atmosphere. If one day you can get past the fact that they are not as polished as GTAV and you try to actually play the games, you'll see they hold up well.

>>382787271
>get a ton of money and buy them back
>find them on the map
>don't die
Try these, also I barely remember any missions where I needed to go find weapons myself to do the mission without dying

>I will shamefully admit that, yes, I played IV and V before I played any of the other ones.

I'm 23 and already I feel like an old man.

OP, eat your vegetables, brush your teeth and then fuck off to bed.

>>382786624
IV had a bike mission like that though, "I Need Your Clothes, Your Boots, and Your Motorcycle." You had to chase the guy through cramped streets and alleyways, the bike is a lot heavier than in San Andreas, and the fail conditions are similar to what you just said; you hit a wall once and you fail the mission.

Lowriders were harder to drive in IV too; not only were they slower than their San Andreas counterparts, they also felt like barges to handle. It's very difficult to lose the cops with one, especially considering the cramped nature of the LC streets.

>>382780641
WEEKEND SOLDIERS!

>>382787271

this, why the fuck would i be bothered with that if it's just fucking boring and literally would stop me sooner or later from ever playing the game.

>>382781047
Seconding with OP here, the mission can eat my ass. God know how many times I tried beating it and I'll end up with Ryder dying
>the oldschool gta is just so strict

>Toy Airplane mission
Heh.

>>382780758
What the fuck? I never played GTA SA until two years ago and now I consider it one if the greatest games of all time.

File: 1488593696524.jpg (33KB, 720x711px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 720x711px

>>382787631
not op but i'm 24 and already feel like these will be my last words.
kiddo, always be yourself and pursue your dreams, you'll more regret the things you didn't do than the ones you did...

>>382787271
I like the newer GTAs as much as the old ones, and I never had to use cheats to complete them. I beat all the GTAs in roughly the same timeframe, and I found the older ones easier for the most part, the AI's movement was so easy to exploit and you had the luxury of going to the Pay N Spray right in front of the cops and still losing your wanted level. The only missions which gave me any trouble were the ones with terrible controls that OP speaks of, and even then, it didn't take too long to adopt to them. It's entirely possible to complete them without cheats.

>>382787792
Really? All I remember is occasionally getting out of the forklift to shoot maybe one or two guys attacking Ryder.

>playing gta on PC
There's your problem. GTA should be played on console or at least with a joystick to be fully enjoyed.

>>382788187
But I can fully enjoy GTA with a keyboard and mouse.

I played them all as they came out and I don't really like to go back to them ever. Except GTA2 aka the best GTA.

>>382788010
Have you tried beating this misson without killing anyone?

>>382788187
I'm playing VC on PC after playing VC and SA on PS2 and I'm finding driving with kb+m a bit easier so idk, maybe I just had a shitty controller

>>382788000
Do these people have trouble with the gang wars as well? How are they struggling with the difficulty of GTA? The only hard part is following the train and toy airplane missions on PS2.

>>382788187

i sure do love that draw distance and auto aim.

>>382788449
The game is meant to be played with auto aim. It's designed around it. Does the PC version not have it?

>>382788346
No, because that's a surefire way to get Ryder's ass capped. Also, why would you do that?

>>382788538

>auto aim is good
anon....
no it doesn't.

>>382780996
>then it's the problem of standards and not the games themselves.
If they fail at basic things like controls or even quality of life it brings down the entire experience. Things like being able to manage menus without a hassle, being told things upfront instead of having to mash every button at every moment to figure things out when it comes to menus, being able to easily move around a 3D plane, being able to attack without going through a dozen steps, being able to open up a map easily, being able to place waypoints, being able to control the camera with the right control stick on console games. These are all very very simple standards that have made games better, and to go to older games and have to acclimate yourself to the times takes away from the entire experience at times.

Here's some very simple examples: TES Daggerfall and anything like Ultima. At the time they were mesmerizing and had massive fandoms, but if you try going back to playing them with modern standards and after dealing with even the most minor improvements they will be a nightmare to play. In Daggerfall for example you have to switch between magic mode and attack mode before you can attack with that attack whereas even in Oblivion all you need to do is set your spell and press a button and it automatically casts, and to attack normally you have to switch back to attack mode to then swing your weapon instead of just pressing M1.

Yes, it's a sign of the times, but older games are much harder to go back to because of this, and going into them with a modern standard can make people think they're bad.

There's maybe 2 missions in the entirety of SA that you need to "prepare" for and that's the final mission and the early mission where you need to rescue Sweet from the girl's house (which is only somewhat difficult because it's early game and you don't have much in the way of weapons or upgrades). Oh and the one mission for Woozie that you need to "prepare" for by grinding your breath meter until you hit the minimum threshold to start the mission.

>>382780641
saving after finishing a mission helps. i never played the pc version but i replayed 3 and vice city on ps2 recently and they were just fine but then again i played the fuck out of those games so i basically know what to do before every mission. also the people who call op underage need to go fuck themselves my fucking brother was born in 2000 and remembers the gta games

>>382788604
If you take auto aim out it's two extremely different games. It's almost a different genre. You're simply not playing the game as it was originally intended.

>>382788538
I think you can use autoaim if you're playing keyboard only but overall I found being able to aim freely a lot easier

>>382788538
Who needs auto-aim with a mouse?
But yes, the old games do have it with gamepad settings on PC, but those also disable camera control with mouse.

>>382788538
you don't need auto aim in pc. you just point and click.

for years I tried to do Zero's RC helicopter mission on PS2, the one where you shoot them out of the sky. I never did it.

Tried it on PC and did it first try

>>382786624
>Like in that GTA SA mission where you have to chase jeffrey on a bike at top speed, if you clip one wall the mission was failed.
You don't actually need to go top speed at all and the mission is insanely easy when you realise that.

>>382787910
>you'll more regret the things you didn't do than the ones you did...
it's both actually.
i'm 26 and just live in regrets.
my past is holding me back so much.
i regrets the things i did,
and regrets the things i din't do.
the present is not looking good at all, in fact it's the worst time ever in my life,
and the future doesn't look too bright either with me fucking up so much.
I can't even move on with the crippling suicidal thoughts all the time.
people cheering me up just looks like they are laughing at me, making fun of me, or just pressuring me like i din't tried or not trying hard enough, even though i give it all i got, and even squeezed more on top of that.
words of encouragement discourage me.

And all i wanted is a simple life where i can have a house to live alone without worrying getting kicked out, enough to feed myself with food, not with fancy dinners, and have a single pet, while all i do is playing vidya or shitposting online.
I'm jobless now,
but even if i'm not, i still need to work my ass off and still not able to live the simple life i want.

I need help, someone need to end my life.
save me from this suffering

>>382788398
I don't get that either; all you had to do in the gang wars was run around for a bit until all the enemies came at you on the sidewalk in a straight line, which they always did, and headshot all of them with the SMG or your weapon of choice. Repeat ad nauseum until you capture all of them. The gang wars were fun, but they were definitely repetitive. And the only reason why the train mission might be hard is because of the same poor AI programming you see in the enemies, and the plane mission might be hard because of the timer and the controls. But once you got used to the controls, you could plan a proper route, land behind the vans, and shoot them all fairly reliably. Those missions are more tedious than hard imo. I found IV and V harder because you were more fragile and it was much harder to exploit the AI. V especially, the AI went from incompetent in the 3D universe, to decent in IV, to downright bullshit OP in V. AI is something Rockstar has always struggled to get right.

>>382788589
That's how I tried to beat it, thought he had good AI
>tfw you are filled with idiots

>>382780996
If GTA San Andreas came out today it wouldn´t be a good game because it actually isn´t...

>>382788948
I've been on top of the train, those three cunts on top of it have absurd amounts of health, they aren't regular NPCs, they're superhuman.

>>382787909
Haters always talk about nostalgia being the only reason that people like a game they hated. They forget that things like gog and steam introduce old games to new players all the time. Some games really do stand the test of time. A similar thing happened to me after Thief 2014 came out. Haters are dumb, man.

>>382788948
Nothing in 4 was hard (besides trying to force yourself to finish such a terrible game). I don't know about 5 because I never played it because GTA4 and RDR were such boring chores I wasn't interested.

File: never don't give up.jpg (38KB, 460x617px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 460x617px

>>382788921
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxGRhd_iWuE

NEVER DON'T GIVE UP ANON

>>382789091
I played it for the first time several months ago and it's my favorite game now. It's the first time in years I've been excited enough to put hundreds of hours into a game.

Also talk shit get hit fag

>>382788948
>because you were more fragile
Funny, I found myself getting raped in seconds in older GTAs while I could just duck behind cover and regen health in V

>>382789174
The only part of IV I had trouble with was that stupid dirtbike jump on the final mission.

>>382788674
The reason that mission is so hard is because there's a fault in the AI's programming (something to do with driving a car, I think), so they have much better aim than they're supposed to.
Being so early on with little health and weak weapons, it's rather jarring.
>>382788698
That's entirely subjective. I've played GTA with a controller and it felt the same as if I were to play with KBM.

>>382789323
I remember back when I played GTA 3 the FBI and Army would instakill me the second I got out of a car.

But maybe I was just a shitter as a kid.

>GTA SA
>reason to go outside of the city into the middle of nowhere is to go to other cities
>GTA V
>reason to go outside of the city into the middle of nowhere is...
How did they fuck this up so hard

>>382789216
>never give up
I already told myself that countless time.
i'm tired and just want everything to end now.

i hope there's someone tell me "you did good, now leave the rest to me." instead.
that would encourage me to push ever harder than hearing people just saying "never give up, keep on going, eventually u will make it!" while not lending a single hand, or give a damn after they said that.
it's easy to asks someone not to quit,
but it's fucking hard to bear the burden along with others.
nobody so far had done that yet, besides of my parents basically giving me a place to live, and feed me.
but it's more a liability than help.
i feel like i'm dragging them down, a dead weight.
which makes me feels like i should kill myself to not burden them anymore.

>>382789516
I kinda miss the road trip aspect that SA had. I used to just enjoy driving around.

>>382780641
Nice essay, you faggot

>>382789673
Yeah, I loved getting a vehicle full of homies and just driving from one side of the map to the other and see what happened along the way.

>>382784471

in V you can die pretty fucking fast in gun fights, likely because it was all tuned for GTAO ultimately.

Missions are also heavily narrative driven and more scripted than just walking in, gunning down a bunch of fucks, grabbing a floating object, and walking out like older games.

So in a way, the new ones are easier, but I wouldn't exactly say they were casualized. Only things I can think of that I would consider "casualized" would be not losing your guns when you die or get arrested, which in all honesty, was a perfectly reasonably repercussion for dying or getting arrested, and shouldn't have been removed.

Also because I personally fucking hate having such a cluttered weapon wheel and would prefer to just have the few select weapons I prefer.

>>382786630
literally git gud

>>382780641
Yes they are mechanically inferior. Especially if you play with keyboard+mouse.

>>382780641
>Let's say you are in a shootout, then suddenly a message will say "He's getting away, go after him QUICK!" Before you even realize what is happening the mission is over and you have to do it all over again.
You see kids, this what we call a true casual, pleb, etc.
Like those unthinking and circle running play testers most of us have heard about, they are living proof that eugenics shouldn't have been shunned.

File: 1407859821207.jpg (43KB, 514x566px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 514x566px

>>382789571
if your fists and punches are weak, do you just let them be like that and accept it?
if you want to live with that mentality than know who and what you are, if you think that this is all you got then do what you think is right and kill yourself.

>>382790037

>gta is a game where you can be bad at
lmao fucking tryhard gaylord, the game isn't fun without cheats and not hard you illiterate, on cock suffocating, mongrel.

File: 1487701831569.jpg (258KB, 1224x552px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1224x552px

>>382780641
I trust everyone is reporting OP for being underage, yes?

>>382780641
While I agree with much of what you said what killed any sort of replayability in GTAV for me was the retarded checkpoint system which made even the *tough* missions piss easy. No challenge = no memorability. Most everyone who played GTA SA remembers the RC helicopter missions, the train meme mission, the driving/flying school challenges.

Some of them were clunky and unfair but once you beat them you often think fondly of those missions and you get a sense of accomplishment. In GTA V I remember the FBI tower mission, two heists and that's it. The most memorable missions were assassinations you did with Franklin cause I'd roleplay the fuck out of them, preparing getaway car, escaping cops on foot, etc.

>>382790030
>>So in a way, the new ones are easier, but I wouldn't exactly say they were casualized. Only things I can think of that I would consider "casualized" would be not losing your guns when you die or get arrested, which in all honesty, was a perfectly reasonably repercussion for dying or getting arrested, and shouldn't have been removed.
It's pointless because anyone who's not dumb would just reload anyway.

>>382789571
you are not alone buddy

>>382790280
>not beating the game first and fucking with cheats after
fag

>>382789143
Even so, all you literally have to do is follow the damn train; keep up a constant, decent speed alongside it, while being far enough away from it so Smoke's AI can shoot them, and the missiom becomes very easy. You did way too much, and apparently lots of others did too; Smoke literally tells you how to beat the mission.
>>382789174
IV wasn't hard either, it was just a little harder than older GTAs because of the reasons I stated; the AI went from incompetent in the 3D universe to at least somewhat decent in IV. Difficulty is one thing you don't play the GTAs for.
>>382789323
I remember the opposite actually; I remeber steamrolling everything in VC and SA, especially once I got more health, and being torn to shreds in V, with the health regen taking too much time to work and it not really being worth the time because depending on the enemy, half a health bar was essentially the same as having no life at all

>>382790309
>underage
huh? this isnt exactly some niche games from the 90s.

>>382789471
>I've played GTA with a controller and it felt the same as if I were to play with KBM.

What? It's auto aim, I can close my eyes and hold a button until I get a six star wanted level. There's at least some difference.

I can somewhat understand why someone wouldn't like San andreas today but at the same time I replayed it like twice in recent years and probably spent like 60 hours both times, enjoying the fuck out of it.

I guess it comes down to knowing about the worse parts already and being able to avoid them. I save scum and minmax with the ammo-gunrange glitch that gives infinite ammo so I basically never lose anything so the game is just about driving and shooting and having fun.

>>382790509

>caring about how other people play games
>caring about morality in a fucking gta game

look at this fag.

>>382789769
Haha I did that shit with a fucking bus once. Picked up prostitutes too just to watch the ridiculous bounce.

>>382788671

You are correct. People say older GTAs are superior even by today's standards, but a lot of what those games have wouldn't be acceptable if they were released today.

>>382790653
>I'm gonna post how I like to completely trivialize a game and nobody's gonna care
Is this what you think?

>>382790080

But the problem is that the graphics are shitty and everything is small, it's hard to see what the fuck you're actually supposed to be doing

>>382790817
FUCK YOU

File: khDLK.jpg (87KB, 544x537px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 544x537px

>>382790280
>>382790653

>>382790817

>i care about how other people play games
why so insecure?

>>382780641
You need to grow to graphics and gameplay, milleniums will just straight into almost realistic graphics and more advanced gameplay, it's almost impossible for them to like older games.

>>382790323
For me at least, I found those missions more tedious than anything because of inadequate programming, and even so, none took me more than three tries to beat, so there was nothing fond for me to remember. I liked the hood missions, especially the one called The Long Stretch, more than the heists personally because of the great atmosphere and music they had, and the environments they took place in: a shady recycling plant and good old Grove Street.

>>382791003
I don't care if that's how they play, I care if they think their opinion matters

>>382780641
>Losing all of your weapons every time you die
Bait OP.
Anybody that has played SA would know that you only lose your weapons when busted.

File: 1498708171568.png (3KB, 280x272px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 280x272px

>>382790964

OUT FUCKING SKILLED HAHA :-DDD

>>382789323
>getting raped in seconds
Only in 3. VC and SA were piss easy when it come to gun fight.

>>382790574
This, people who played the older GTAs act like it's some sort of achievement; it's really not. San Andreas in particular was the highest selling game on the highest selling console of all time; if you had a PS2 in 2004, you probably had San Andreas too. They're not obscure titles, the only ones that are are I and II, Advance, and maybe Chinatown Wars.

The older games arent terribly hard but failing a mission is ten times more frustrating. Yes, losing all your guns fucking sucks. There's just no getting around that. So if you dont want to just save over and over, you have to go and buy all your guns again, and you have to do this every time you fail. VC included a taxi to get back to the mission start, but its fucking useless without your guns. So every time you fail - and you can fail missions pretty quickly if you don't know what you're doing - you have to drive to the gun store, buy the guns, drive to the mission start. Restarting a mission usually takes at least 2-3 minutes which is just unacceptable, especially when you're replaying a tough mission multiple times.

If you are playing on pc then the aiming in san andreas is fucked with a mouse

>>382791263
3 is pretty easy to if you just rely on drive bys

>Start up SA
>Get to train mission
>Fuck this game I quit
>Start it up again
>Get to forklift mission
>Fuck this game I quit
>Start it up again
>STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON.comic

Glad I stuck with it. Don't be a quitter like me.

>>382791317
>>382790574
no one is trying to say that it's obscure you fucking tards they're implying that if they played IV and V before SA/VC then they are too young to have played them as a kid

PC controls make it way more difficult, as when you have to adjust to aim you are left totally open to gunfire most of the time. It really was meant to be played with lock on on PS2

>>382791524
give me a break, my brother was born in 2000 and remembers playing the ps2 era gta games. you arent special.

>>382791325
But if I didn't lose my guns I wouldn't have memorized all the weapons and armor locations. I like being able to start a new game and grab the AK 47 behind the Piggly Wiggly for the first missions.

>>382791376
If by "fucked" you mean "fucking easy". Playing SA on PC is an easy head-clicking game.

>>382791208
I thought you only get to keep them if you're dating that nurse chick

>>382791571
Didn't GTA III only have auto aim? Like you literally couldn't manually aim? Or have the drugs fried my memory?

File: 1432932351423.png (15KB, 278x510px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 278x510px

>alley oop

>>382789323

This, I really don't understand how people say the older games are easier. In VC and SA, if you are being shot at for 3-4 seconds you are pretty much fucked. Your health goes down way more quickly.

In IV and V, if you are being shot at, you can quickly take cover. But in SA and VC, if you are out in the open and being shot at, you are probably screwed. There's definitely way less margin for error.

>>382790834
You've got a radar telling you exactly where your destination/enemy is. Half the time there are colorful arrows floating over important things. Even a child can't fuck it up.
I think if you can't see what you're doing you might seriously have eye problems and are using the graphics as a scapegoat.

>>382791571
I found it much easier with free aim actually, as all I had to do was crouch, move around a bit to take advantage of the AI pathfinding and how they grouped themselves together, and go for as many headshots in one instant as possible. I couldn't do that with lock-on aim.

>>382791208

No, that's bullshit, you lose your weapons when you die.

>>382791759
ON PC you can manual aim but it's garbage.
>No headshot multiplier unless it's a rifle/sniper
Like, why even fucking bother.

>>382791650
Go play it and see how awful it is. Its not even free aim, the mouse moves on a grid

>>382791202

>muh opinions on video games
what do you call a white knighting faggot that doesn't even have 1% percent chance of getting pussy unlike the regular white knights that have a 1% chance of getting pussy?

>>382791424

Neither of those 2 missions are hard. At all.

>>382791571
>play on PC
>popping headshots is a cakewalk
>laugh at a bunch of headless corpses
So hard.

>>382791976
Someone who needs cheats

>>382792019
No but they have made a lot of people angry

>>382780641

I did find it very annoying how you don't really know your objective until right when the event happens. The cutscenes don't explain anything really about what you're supposed to do, they are very brief, so you are going into pretty much every mission blind.

>>382791625
I'm not the one who made the claim you absolute sperg, I'm just explaining it. If your brother somehow played VC when he was 2 then good for him

>>382791967
I've replayed it more times than I can count. It's easy as piss.

>>382792137

you the one that is full on muh code of honour because of a video game.

>>382792235
stop projecting

>>382792247
You know he's right though

>>382791789
>In VC and SA, if you are being shot at for 3-4 seconds you are pretty much fucked
Have you try crouching or running around? AI can't aim for shit when you do that.

File: degenerate.png (158KB, 327x431px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 327x431px

>>382792247
All I said is don't act like your opinion means shit if you can't beat fucking GTA games without cheating

>>382791789
You can take cover in VC and SA too even though there's no cover system; just crouch and use the environment and make little tweaks to your aim. And the environment besides cars wasn't destructible, so you had tons of options. In VC and SA you had much more health and armor than you did in IV and V because it was possible to upgrade both, and the AI was incompetent; they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, they always lined themselves up a certain distance away from you, and if they were in groups, you could get them to run in straight lines and pop like 5 or 6 of them at once with headshots. If you ran away to get more health the AI doesn't really follow you. You can't get the AI to run in straight lines in IV and V, and the AI actually used tactics besides run in front of you and shoot; they had the ability to flank and jump over cover, and V's AI had pinpoint accuracy, even more so when you were in a car. Even if the AI did hit you, all you had to do was run around a lot as Tommy and roll around as CJ and the AI couldn't touch you.

File: vc.png (68KB, 661x229px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 661x229px

>>382792425
>when you run out of valid arguments

>>382792594
yeah it came out in 2002 so what? maybe people werent interested in those games until 4 came out. im tired of faggots using the underage argument whenever people shit on older games.

>>382780641
Vice City and San Andreas are still some of my favorite games of all time, but I played them as a kid, so maybe it's nostalgia?
Still some things you said are problematic.
>I just find the controls atrocious
I beg to differ. KB+M feels extremely tight to me. When I played them on controller, they were awful, but modern mechanics like being able to free look and aim really well feel genuinely great.
>the shooting feels so stiff and imprecise
guns have real range in these games. you can't use an smg to take out people from a distance. use a mouse and the right gun and this won't be an issue
>losing all your weapons every time you die
this is still a mechanic in the new games, at least when you're arrested. the solution is obviously to save the game before you do anything serious. there are plenty of areas to save at later on in the hard parts of both games.
>almost every mission suprises you with further objectives than you are expecting
when I was growing up, this was a good thing.
>he's getting away, go after him quick
literally just shoot him
>you can only do really well at these missions if you plan them out beforehand
exactly! go to ammunation, buy the right gun, get some armor. put the extremely high amount of money you earn to use. stop hoarding your wealth. get good cars, good guns, and good armor.
>missions like pic related are just awful
there are zero awful missions in san andreas, friend. difficult =/= awful.
>gimmicky missions
the game requires total familiarity with the control scheme, yes. you are expected to actually know your keyboard/controller layout by the end of the game. again, don't see how this is considered a bad thing.

the only games with truly difficult controls are the first 2 GTAs, and even then, after an hour of playing, you should know what you're doing.

>>382792487

who said i can't beat it?
just because i use jumpjets, guns and rocketman cheats means that the game suddenly became incredibly easy? i just made it more bearable.
if you think that gta games are hard under any circumstances than you need to fuck right off back to your shitty third world country, pablo.

>>382792707
People shouldn't shit on older games if their first time playing them was recently.

It's like taking anything that was decent for it's time 20 years ago and then comparing it to what we have today, no shit it's going to be dated.

>>382793181
that doesnt make them underage that just makes them ignorant

>>382792741
>there are zero awful missions in san andreas
The only non awful flying mission in SA is the last one with Hydra and you know it.

>>382793181

But everyone on /v/ still says that VC and SA are objectively superior games even by today's standards. So why can't people point out that a lot of assets in these games are outdated?

>Spend months getting into blackjack on my phone
>Get to Venturas and make my fortune playing blackjack
>Buy a nice home with my winnings

It's all the little extras that keep me coming back. Interior areas that aren't marked on the map, Easter eggs, all the things that have nothing to do with the story. What a great fucking game.

File: Smokesays.jpg (13KB, 236x269px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 236x269px

All you had to do was get on the damn hype train CJ!

>>382793356
Because they're better games at their core, even if things like graphics and control schemes aren't identical to what we have now.

>>382780641
How different is VC and SA from 3? So far the bad things with 3 for me is having to drive back to the mission start everytime I fail, and that I can barley use any weapon besides the uzi, sniper, and m16. Are these improved upon?

File: 1499146823904.png (48KB, 300x171px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 300x171px

>>382790030
>So in a way, the new ones are easier, but I wouldn't exactly say they were casualized
You can literally skip a mission entirely if you die 3 times in a row in GTA V, how is that "not casualized"? At least GTA IV had some semblance of challenge by not giving Niko any superpowers like slowing down time or making him invincible or some dumb shit like that.

>>382793556
SA is even worse when it comes to dying. The size of the map means you have to run all the way back across the highway to get to your home.

>>382793614
>skip a mission entirely if you die 3 times in a row in GTA V
Dude, really?

>>382793356
did you even bother looking at the OP?

The mechanics of V are not casualized, the missions are, this is an important difference. V's controls are absolutely fine, and superior to the older GTAs, it's just that the missions are too easy.

>>382793556

They are actually WORSE when it comes to these things, III is the least tedious when it comes to restarting missions.

>>382793748
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10lkkUlKMgo

GTA 3 > SA > GTA V > VC > GTA IV

I even replayed 3 a few months ago, and it was still fun cept for this mission

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD-LPNowVgU

File: adsfds.gif (4MB, 320x570px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 320x570px

>>382789170
wait are you seriously defending Thief 2014, or are you saying Thief 2014 was so fucking bad you tried 1 and 2 and saw how timeless and good they are?

>>382793672
>>382793983
Shame, I really enjoy losing weapons when you die cause it makes you feel that you really have to prepare for each mission, but I guess I'll just have to deal with the backtracking.

>>382793672
The only mission in SA that I was only ever annoyed by having to redo the trip was the one mission where you have to steal the combine harvester from the hillbillies and that's only because in that playthrough I was using a mod that made weapons more deadly and those rifles could rape you.

>>382793815
There was only one post that even tried to address all his arguments in a methodical manner
>>382792741
everyone else just called him underage and a casual.
>>382793890
Yeah, they should have made the missions harder to accommodate the special abilities. They already had bullshit AI, why not have more of it?

Everyone says the new GTAs are too casual but honestly, the truth is that most challenge form the older games was moreso due to shitty controls and design, that is now outdated. People are saying how casual it is when V has checkpoints, but honestly, hardly anybody actually enjoys failing 3/4 of the way into a mission, and having to buy all your guns again and restart the entire thing. It's just not fun at all. Complaining about checkpoints makes more sense when you're talking about platformers.

Also, people complaining about the GPS, it is once again a necessary edition, its not fun always having to look at the map, or fumbling around looking for where to go. Ask yourself this: the newer games give you the OPTION to turn off the GPS but I bet hardly anyone does it, even the people complaining. Why? Because they don't want to, it's not fun to turn it off. And further, imagine if the game gave you the option to turn off checkpoints. How many people would seriously take that option? 2% of players, if that?

>>382794198
im defending thief 2014.

>>382793614

Blame this on modern games being high budget. When you spend over 200 million making a game, you're going to want everyone to be able to see every part of the game. So they allow you to skip missions if it's too hard.

Its just the way gaming is now, if you want challenge, you have to create it for yourself

>>382794365
you didn't make an argument about how checkpoints aren't casual, in fact if anything you strengthened it

File: hulksmashhands.jpg (29KB, 500x455px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x455px

>>382794378
>>382794378
Holy fuck how, its fucking AWFUL, its legit SH HD tier bad. Its so fucking bad its not even funny. Sorry anon, but thats real shit taste.

>>382794365
I don't know about GTA5, but the missions in GTA4 are so heavily over-scripted they might as well be QTEs which is why they're shit (on top of being really samey). TBoGT was a bit better in this regard but still.

>>382780641
>Underage b&

San Andreas with a m/kb makes the shooting easy. However I agree anon. The GTA series is my favorite series but even I must say that the mission design and other design choices are quite shit by today's standard. However yes it's the openworld, exploration, immersion shit that is still fucking A1 after all this time.

>>382787271
>having to replinish more when you die is so fucking boring
honestly this wouldn't be an issue if it didn't sound like all you do is launch the game to maybe play two missions before you start spawning tanks and hyrdas/running around shooting everyone with a minigun on full wanted level.

i've literally never used a single cheat on a GTA game in any save files that i wanted to use to continue progress. i've definitely tried the cheats to see what they did but never saved with cheats. they got boring. i always play the game through 100% completion with no deaths/fails/busts or cheats. cheating ruins the fun of the game.

i knew a kid growing up who lived down the street who believed the total opposite. he loved cheating so much that cheating always became the point of the game. he'd get mad at video games when he didn't understand the objective because he skips cutscenes, he'd get mad when he was losing, then immediately look up cheats. i'd try to get him to play games legitimately then come back to discover he stopped playing because they didn't have cheats, or that he ruined the fucking game for himself by just cheating through it. he owned a cheating mechanism for almost every console he had. said kid was also an immense faggot even later in life. you are this fucking gay.

>>382794378
Did you mean to say you're not defending Thief 2014? It sounded to me like you were saying 2014 is shit while the classic games are still good

>>382794669
What? They're really not; they're as open as ever, see the Snow Storm. In fact, IV probably has what is the most diverse mission in terms of canon gameplay choice of the whole series:

http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Lure_(GTA_IV)

>There are a number of different ways to kill the man.
Sniping him from the opposite building:
>Shoot the cable dish
By shooting the cable dish right outside his window, he'll get close to the malfunctioning TV and on Niko's sight. Don't take long or he'll sit down again out of sight.
>Calling his number
From the opposite building, see through the sniper rifle's lens his house phone number (is 5455550122) and call him. He'll answer the phone confusing the player with somebody named "Shaniqua". This is a chance to shoot him as he's on sight.
>Shooting his windows
From the opposite building, try shooting any of the glasses from the windows. This will cause him to poke his head out to see what's happening. There's a chance to snipe him.
>Shooting the TV set
From the roof across the target's building, snipe the TV screen. This will also cause him to see outside his window. Snipe him as he does so.
>Shoot him from the fire escape outside his apartment
It is possible to shoot him from above the fire escape of his building, but don't get too close or he'll flee.

Luring him out from his safehouse:
If the player wants to attempt to eliminate the target by making him leave his apartment, there's some options available.
>Dialing the number three times or causing three of disturbances
As listed above, without shooting him will cause the target to flee the apartment.
>Throwing a grenade to the window
The explosion, unfortunately, won't dispose the target but cause him to flee.
>Getting too close to his window
If the player approaches the window by the fire escape and gets too close, he'll attempt to leave. If he does, he gets in a Dukes, which you can destroy before he does so. If you do, he runs into an alleyway and whips out a pistol at you.

>>382780758
This. I know that older GTA games have a lot of flaws, but nostalgia is a helluva drug.

>>382795105
Also, if you want more proof, check out this guy
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8E0_qbRVNvSYjuq9PpPWzBix5w1188BO
He goes over all the possibilities during GTA IV's missions, and as the game goes on and the missions get more elaborate, you'll see that there are usually at least 15, and sometimes as high as 30, minutes of possible playthroughs and occurrences for each mission, when the most straightforward way usually takes around 5.

>>382780641
I never actually *played* San Andreas until after IV and V and I can still see it's the best in the series with IV.

>>382780996
This might be the stupidest thing I have ever ever read

File: VC SA.jpg (19KB, 286x176px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 286x176px

>when games in the same series from 2002 and 2004 are more fun than GTAV

>>382780641
Immersion.

>>382796403
Do you remember when it only took 1 year to develop Vice City and 2 years to develop San Andreas?
Meanwhile, at modern Rockstar:
>3.5 years just to announce V
>5.5 years for it come out
>4 years later and VI hasn't even been announced
>7+ years for Red Dead Redemption sequel
>11+ years for Bully sequel. Still hasn't officially been announced.

>>382792812
would it not be easier to just find/buy a bunch of weapons and save so you can save scum?

File: will.gif (2MB, 470x437px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 470x437px

>he didn't date the nurse to get out of the hospital free and keep your weapons

>>382797482
Can't defend VI, RDR, or Bully, but the first two make at least a little sense because VC and SA are essentially reskins and retextures of III in different locations with more extra, rather basic in concept, side content and map area on top of everything, and to do that in the times specified isn't entirely unreasonable, as they got more and more familiar with the current tech. VC and SA are spinoffs of III; IV is III's real sequel, that's why it's so similar to III and so different from VC and SA. V looks completely different from IV, and it took R* every bit of ingenuity they could think of to make V work on the PS3 and the 360, that's why it took so long. So I guess you could blame the consoles, not the company. Compare the initial trailers to the final product of V, even those look different.

>beat game legit
>have fun with cheats after
That's how I do it for any game

File: 1490595886012.jpg (64KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 480x480px

>>382798154
>it's real
Holy shit.

>>382780641
>Losing all of your weapons every time you die is unbelievably tedious.
no, it's just you who are a casual. there needs to be penalties for death. and rebuying/finding another pickup (yes you can get all the weapons for free by picking them up) is that penalty

the games are mainly good for the car chases which IV and onwards do everything in their power to discourage you from engaging in

maybe you miss watching TV or going on the internet and trading stocks

faggot

>>382782139
>Shit flinging casual spastic

Now that's an insult.

>>382782437
>They were really good at slowly building up and exposing you to the world though. The pacing of San Andreas is fantastic, you literally start off on some crappy bike and spend the first few hours shitting around ghetos before you start building towards better cars and guns and it's not until halfway through or so you even have an airfield to start fucking with planes and helicopters.

It wasnt until this post that I realised how much i miss stuff like that in open worlds. Open worlds now kinda just give you the whole map right away. Maybe not the best cars and guns, but thats small stuff compared to entire systems and giant chunks of the map. Sure its nice feeling small in a huge place, but the feeling of exploring a map for awhile, thinking thats it, and then having another massive part unlock, is such an amazing feeling.

>>382802664
>unlocking the second island in GTA 3

>>382780641
It's because you're underage. If youve never played San Andreas of Vice City as a kid you need to get off this site

>>382788921

I am 29 I have only a highschool degree, but this didn't prevent me from working hard and becoming successful.

I have my own house and my own company and married to a wonderful wife.

Best tip I can give to people who don't have a high degree is start your own business it will e hard but if you play your cards right you can have a nice life.

Recently replayed the GTAs
GTA 4 > GTA SA > GTA 3 > GTA VC > GTA 5

VC is overrated.

Playing the GTA Stories games on my PSP felt revolutionary to me, I don't think a lot of people these days really understand how amazing it was to finally play GTA on the go.

It's a shame we'll never get another GTA spinoff on the PS Vita or 3DS.

When I was a kid they were awesome because there really was nothing else like them, but by the time I was actually allowed to own them, GTA IV had come out and the physics and driving controls in that game alone meant it blew the other ones out of the water completely. The physics in that game are honestly the most fun thing about it and can keep you entertained for a long long time.

Literally "I wasn't born when these games came out so I place them in context": The Thread

>>382780641
Only nostalgia fags like them. GTA games are all virtually the exact same game except the newer ones aren't as clunky as the older.

>>382804784
Fucking this.
GTA IV is my favorite simply because of its physics.
Physics made the game's gameplay absolutely stellar, driving was fun and shooting was fun, that's all that ever matters to me in a GTA game to be honest family. The good story was just one big-ass cherry on the top.

File: 4L_488MgZ3G.png (20KB, 784x349px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 784x349px

>>382787909
Same here, but I consider it utter crap. Uselessly huge, tedious, with many dead moments.
Story is half decent though.

I also played Vice City and I liked it more, it was just a short and small Scarface tribute, less ambitious but more focused

>>382804784
the physics were great but IV is also the game that gave us bowling, dining, dating etc minigames that are boring as sin. that's what you spend most of your time on.

the gameworld is also super empty. there's 1 ammu-nation and 1 spraypaint shop for a section of city that's bigger than the entirety of GTA III and VC, so you have to drive for ages to get anywhere.

the physics is really all it has going for it. moment to moment the older ones are just more fun, and don't try to stop you from fucking with the police. so many roads in III are just put there for the sake of being able to have an awesome car chase, something that's completely missing from IV.

>>382791784
what?

>>382805258
I unironically enjoyed Simpsons Hit and Run more than GTA as a kid because of the physics when you hit pedestrians.

File: 1456873513589.jpg (57KB, 1200x740px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1200x740px

tl;dr
>i want to press F to win the game

>>382805807
>Simpsons Hit and Run
god damn that was fun

File: 1411697659512.jpg (22KB, 192x256px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 192x256px

>trying to play a torrented copy of VC on my PC
>it's a buggy piece of shit
>for whatever reason cutscenes will just hang once they're loaded and not start unless I run the game through steam and open the steam interface over and over again
>Jumbles my fucking keyboard keys once I'm done playing the game until I restart my PC
I just want to experience the old GTAs

>>382780641
Old games are old, and may be lacking in the years of gameplay improvements that later entries, or even the industry as a whole, have developed.

>>382805641
San Andreas gave you dining and dating, and no one ever calls those boring when talking about San Andreas. It's only bad when it's in IV. Also, the ammu-nation problem is easily mitigated by making friends with Jacob, who is your first friend, and getting his mobile gun shop as a reward. The prices are cheaper too. Everyone's amazed when San Andreas gives you rewards when you go out with people and build relationships but suddenly it's a cardinal sin when it's in IV. And finally, the physics in IV are precisely why the car chases are so fun; every corner is a potential fuck up waiting to happen, and you have to be on your toes for so much more of the time. You also have to choose your car carefully because every car feels different in some way. It helps that if you choose a supercar, especially the Infernus, in IV, it feels so much more special because the supercars in IV are actually rare.

>>382806348
do a small amount of googling to find the community patch you shit. do you have a brain?

>>382806719
because SA didn't revolve around the boring stuff, it was just filler for the action

in IV you do nothing but

I honestly believe that technology improves gameplay.

Movies age, but movies don't age like games do. Games age like spoiled milk.

>>382806935
Except for the fact that something like VC's driving has more fucking going on than driving in a modern GTA style game.

>>382807050
yeah but that's not exactly what i'm talking about. you're talking about game design getting dumbed down.

>>382806871
And everything I just said is extra content in IV as well that makes the game more convenient for you, just like in San Andreas. There's only one time dating is in the main story, and that's to introduce a character who becomes super important later on. You can call the main content in IV boring, but bear in mind that boring isn't a objective criticism and is inherently biased, as I just pointed out in the other post.

>>382807243
All the technology in the world barely does shit when it's being used to poor ends. Sure they're more graphical effects telling you that the driving is satisfying. But the mechanics don't back it up.

File: caracalla.jpg (281KB, 850x850px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 850x850px

>>382789070
>That's how I tried to beat it, thought he had good AI
Why the fuck did you think he had a health bar?
Holy fucking shit. These are the kind of mouthbreathing kids infesting this board nowadays. Jesus Christ.

>>382807270
it's still fucking boring

>>382789571
you sound like you have the brain of a girl

lay off the xenoestros fag

>>382810825
it's still fucking interesting

>>382811141
it really isn't

>>382811238
it really is

>>382811313
no

>>382811479
yes

File: a0826052457_10.jpg (322KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1200x1200px

>>382792707
>people werent(sic) interested in [Grand Theft Auto] until 4 came out

>>382780641
If you can't enjoy san andreas you legitimately have extremely shitty taste.

>>382780641
You suck at video games if you can't adjust to controls that old.

You simply get used to it. After that it should be no issue.