GTAGaming Forums

GTAGaming Forums (http://www.gtagaming.com/forums/index.php)
-   Grand Theft Auto IV (http://www.gtagaming.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=273)
-   -   The Anti-Wish-List List (http://www.gtagaming.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85644)

Schism 03-18-2007 04:30 PM

The Anti-Wish-List List
 
My wish for GTAIV goes against everyone else's wish so far.
Everyone wants bigger and better.
But the bigger things get, the more chances the collapse under their own weight.
So much emphasis on quantity, not enough on quality.
I want to see GTAIV as more of a simplified approach to the series.
And improvement, but a new beginning.
One good city - large enough to give a lot of free roam, but not too large as to have too many unusuable vague spots.
A good, condensed, interactive city, rather than acres and acres of generic land with un-enterable buildings.
It's quality we want.
Quality of story, design, and implimentation.
Quantity should only be considered AFTER you have the quality part down straight.

*steps off soap box*

*throws two cents into can*

GTA Mike 03-18-2007 04:32 PM

I agree I want a lot of detail in the game, and I think with the next generation they can handle making a very large area and still keep it detailed and interesting

Thundercracker 03-18-2007 04:35 PM

That's why San Andreas sucked. They gave only a handful of improvements and spanned them out over a large space, adding stupid rural areas to increase play time by making you drive forever to get from place to place.

Slim Trashman 03-18-2007 05:12 PM

Only thing I could say I really don't want is another gangster themed GTA.

Edit: I also would not prefer the game to take place outside the USA or any time but modern day.

T-Virus 03-18-2007 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olin
That's why San Andreas sucked. They gave only a handful of improvements and spanned them out over a large space, adding stupid rural areas to increase play time by making you drive forever to get from place to place.

Excactly!

Although I enjoyed SA a lot, this is where the problem lies.

I myself would also rather see 1 large city with some countryside, if it helps R* focusing on details rather the size.

Clayton 03-18-2007 07:14 PM

I definately agree with Slim, I don't want another gangsta GTA. It pretty much had to be done once, but...just no.

And I personally disagree, I loved the enormous countryside, but maybe that's just me.

swallowed 03-18-2007 08:30 PM

The countryside was okay imo, I didn't like to drive the long distances like Olin said like in that mission "Photo Opprotunity" it took too long to drive to where you were supposed to go. I guess it would be better if there was more life in the countryside and that would keep me occupied for awhile.

Thundercracker 03-18-2007 08:32 PM

The countryside made me angry and frustrated. I knew it like the back of my hand, I just still had to navigate through it. It was pretty boring as well.

Jimmy_86 03-18-2007 08:48 PM

Although I agree that too big would be dull and possibly repetative (just look at LA in TC:SoLA), I thought SA was reasonable. It only takes 2-3 minutes for most long journeys. Gives you a chance to listen to the radio, which I love doing.

If you look at VC and compare it's amount of gameplay to the map size, then do the same for SA, the ratio is quite different. I don't know exact numbers but from experience the SA map is about 4-6 times bigger than VC but the game a bit under twice as long, meaning less game per square inch (if you will). If they keep the ratio closer to what is was for VC I would imagine this would help.

X-reS 03-18-2007 10:28 PM

I enjoyed the off roading in SA. If you don't like it you could always fly. That another reason it was good. The large space was good for flying over. It was fun to explore originally. I think their is just as much detail in SA as VC. VC always came off over rated to me. Other then the great storyline ,and the environment their wasn't much after that. Once you get past the fact that it was the 80s the environment would get really boring.

Ian 03-18-2007 10:37 PM

I'd probably like it if they included one huge city with obvious different areas (commerical, residential, industrial, etc) one countryside an a small town or two. Make it slightly bigger than in SA, but not too stretched out. I didn't like the multiple small towns.

Btw, I think it was pretty balanced in SA, plus when not in a mission you can go into the countries and pick on cops and go off-road car chasing - usually with hilarious results. But the area restriction has got to go, it's kinda odd that they set up total road blocks just so CJ can't pass.

Schism 03-19-2007 04:39 AM

Yeah, don't get me wrong, the outback areas in SA were okay.
I loved offroading and dirt-biking.
And a plane would be useless if you only have a small city to fly over in one short trip.
I just don't want them to go too far with that.
Like I said, quality over quantity.

Xeroer 03-19-2007 04:48 AM

San Andreas rocked.
You all sucked!

I actually like SanAn better than the earlier games.. The size of it was to try something new.
I'm sure the new GTA won't be oversized and underused, though.

jammsbro 03-19-2007 05:49 AM

SA ROCKS like a MoFo

i agree.

its called grand theft auto so it should be about gansters and criminals anyway.

i just want the changing of clothes to be faster, buying and changing clothes takes aaaagees.

Vampilehunter 03-20-2007 12:51 AM

SA seemed more like an experiment to see how much they could pack into a ps2 GTA in order to see what would work or not on the ps3. I agree completely with the original poster. I'm sort of hoping that 4 is sort of a reworked Liberty City. I just liked the variety of terrain and atmosphere of that city the best.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.