Wheres the fecking parachute?

tok9

Single Malt wrote: »

Sorry dude, I don't rate MGS. I find the story relies too heavily on cutscenes, and the cutscenes are over long, and self-indulgent. I just don't like Kojima's style of story telling. Its aged...badly. I never even finished Snake Eater, as I got pissed off having to watch a cutscene after every 10 mins gameplay.

fair enough i'll accept ur opinion but just cause there's a lot of cutscenes i wouldn't say the story telling is poor..

anyway back to gta

thebman

Ok you can't give out about the planes because what would do when you ran out of world?

The world is just too small and they couldn't make it as big as SA becuase they couldn't afford to!!!! There was a reason GTA 3 was small too. This game is to pay for the game engine development and then they will build on it in the following releases this gen.

This is the way they did it with GTA 3, Vice City and SA and they are doing it again! Its not a hard sequence to spot.

That is the formula that has made this series one of the most popular in the world so why would you throw that system away?

Ciaran500

Sticking open fairly bare country side between the three islands like they did in SA wouldn't of cost them that much extra. Pretty sure it was a design descision after all the complaints about SA.

krudler

i do miss the parachute, as for the not putting it in for "realism" part yeah that doesnt hold up the gta games arent meant to be realistic, you canplay them realistically if you want but i always enjoyed the more ridiculous aspects of SA, that hoverpack was great , and yes it is annoying that a next gen game is missing stuff the ps2 could handle

TheDoc

i had a very fun scene unroll today where i wasn in a chopper, being hunted by a chopper...i went over some water, bailed out, other player obviously didnt notice me bailing out as he was shooting my copter, got onto the sand and shot him down, was one of the best sequences ive had in a game.

the game is brilliant and everyone who is negetitive towards it is being very nit picky imo, there hasnt been such an accomplished game in a long time. And the more you get into it, the more fun its becoming.

i rarely ever finished a gta because i found the story and charatcers boring, but this one has me engrossed and im spending more times on missions then anything else.

like honestly who spends much time in their apartment?

i have to say ive got 350,000 dollars in the game and im sure if there was property to be bought i would, but im sure its being saved for the next installment, this is to break in the engine, and possibly the character who could feature further down the line?

have to say my favourtie character so far after Vice Citys character.

Jack Sheehan

Feelgood wrote: »

Flamethrower (My all time favourite)


Basically they should have just released GTA SA with XBOX / PS3 Graphics,
would have made for a much better game IMO.

Mac wants the Flamethrower!

pipeliner

I think that all of the talk about not having various aspects of the game that were available in San Andreas has little to do with it not being possible.

San Andreas went a bit overboard with all the gameplay mixes in it, making it a game of many talents and master of none.

Rockstar were trying to make this game more grounded and realistic in my opinion, by removing all the waste that was beginning to bog down the previous versions making the new version more pure.

Doesn't explain why EVERY. SINGLE. MISSION. has to be the exact same though.....

Back to the point of the parachutes, the sadist in me enjoys making Niko plummet to his doom, especcially in that extremely annoying helicopter chase mission.

thebman

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Sticking open fairly bare country side between the three islands like they did in SA wouldn't of cost them that much extra. Pretty sure it was a design descision after all the complaints about SA.

Right except then people would be biatching about the miles of badly textured countryside with nothing in it :eek:

Deliverance XXV

Ok I agree with everyone's argument here but surely Rockstar could have given people the choice?

They could have put countryside in but not make it mission specific. Jetpack/parachute as a cheat. Upgradeable weapons would have been nice. Putting a red-dot sight on your assault rifle or a silencer on your pistol would have been class. Buying property would have been a welcome addition/comeback from me. I don't mean mansions or anything, but just having the option there of where I can live, be it a crummy 2 bed to a upmarket apt.

Bottom line is they could have put a lot more in and give the people the choice of how they reach a destination, how they kill a person or the customisation that SA offered.

Royale with Cheese

Some people like the countryside, some don't. They can't please everybody. I'd say they took it out to go back to basics. Get the gameplay right and keep the map smallish to not over-complicate things.

It was exactly what I was expecting them to do, if they'd included all the aspects of SA in GTA 4 they'd have nowhere to go next. I'd expect them to add them in, for the next gen sequels. Personally I prefer having a big map and varied terrain like countryside and desert to drive around. Liberty City is the perfect size though, big enough to not become boring, but any bigger and it'd just be a big urban sprawl, all looks the same. You need variety to pull off a big map. With being able to get in a taxi and go anywhere in the map in a matter of seconds I don't see how people who like a smaller map could complain, and I don't see how Rockstar would keep the map small because of them.

ongarite

Where is the countryside, rolling hills and desert in New York??
Of course there is none, NYC is a metropolis of concrete and metal as recreated in GTA4.

San Andreas was a recreation of the low rise urban sprawl of LA and San Jose.

Weapon mods wouldn't be welcome in my view and would potentially break many of the missions in the single-player game. GTA is not COD4 IMO.

Charlie

ongarite wrote: »

Where is the countryside, rolling hills and desert in New York??
Of course there is none, NYC is a metropolis of concrete and metal as recreated in GTA4.

In New Jersey which Alderney is based on.

Royale with Cheese

ongarite wrote: »

Where is the countryside, rolling hills and desert in New York??
Of course there is none, NYC is a metropolis of concrete and metal as recreated in GTA4.

Rockstar said that in the very early stages of planning for the game they were thinking of doing New York State, which would have had plenty of countryside, but they quickly changed their minds.

thebman

King Nothing wrote: »

Ok I agree with everyone's argument here but surely Rockstar could have given people the choice?

They could have put countryside in but not make it mission specific. Jetpack/parachute as a cheat. Upgradeable weapons would have been nice. Putting a red-dot sight on your assault rifle or a silencer on your pistol would have been class. Buying property would have been a welcome addition/comeback from me. I don't mean mansions or anything, but just having the option there of where I can live, be it a crummy 2 bed to a upmarket apt.

Bottom line is they could have put a lot more in and give the people the choice of how they reach a destination, how they kill a person or the customisation that SA offered.

They could of but it would have cost more than 100 million to make then and you'd still be waiting for it

Feelgood

Another general observation....

How come you never see a cop on a motorbike?.

miju

because there are none. it took me a while to cop onto as well (pardon the pun ) . another thing R* took out for some strange reason

thebman

Feelgood wrote: »

Another general observation....

How come you never see a cop on a motorbike?.

because they too lazy or didn't have time to put it in

Personally if I was a cop on a motorbike and someone was going around blind firing rocket launchers and running over pedestrians, I'd be nowhere to be found too

TomCo

There are cops on motorbikes!

I saw one last night, guy was chasing me.
I was on a motorbike myself so maybe thats the reason.

Ciaran500

Theres no cops on motorbikes, unless a cop happened to grab the nearest vehicle that happened to be a bike.

miju

pic or it didnt happen , in all 40 hours i've been playing this in all manner of vehicles i've yet to seen a police bike

Single Malt

TBH, I thought I saw a motorbike cop the other day on a 3* wanted. But I thought I was imagining it. Now that someone else chimed in I am doubting myself Not really, it was probs just a regular person.

TomCo

Ill take a picture if it happens again.

projectmayhem

TomCo wrote: »

Ill take a picture if it happens again.

if it was a police bike just take the bike and save it

ongarite

I was on 4 stars last night and was chased by cop on motorbike also.

Best way to recreate incident, go to car park, form star-shape of cars and drop grenade in middle and watch the fireworks happen.

Markvtos

I agree with both camps. GTA4 is a Fantastic game, and i can see why thay would want to get back to basics, but San Andreas spoiled us way too much! The massive map of SA was very frustrating to drive around and probably too big! But for flying around base jumping it was perfect, and just breath taking, i really miss the parachutes. Also, i actually don't mind that there is no planes in GTA4, by the time you actually take off and get the plane under control, you'd be at the end of the third island! I'm not saying GTA4 is small, just that it's too small for planes to have any real use. Lastly, I really hope to god R* don't put in friends/girlfriends in the next GTA, that bit nearly ruins the game. "No I do not want to play darts with you Roman, i'm in the middle of shooting up Clucking Bell!"

Markvtos

And one more thing, please don't use the "realism" defence to bail R* out on EVERYTHING! Simply put, games that are too realistic tend to be far less fun, especially free roaming games (for example The Getaway). The reason for this is, games are about ESCAPING real life, if only for a few hours. If GTA becomes too real, or too serious, that's the day the franchise will begin to crumble. Luckily it hasn't reached that point yet. You can still have lots of silly mindless fun!

WellyJ

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Sticking open fairly bare country side between the three islands like they did in SA wouldn't of cost them that much extra. Pretty sure it was a design descision after all the complaints about SA.

Never been to NYC then i take it

thebman

Markvtos wrote: »

I agree with both camps. GTA4 is a Fantastic game, and i can see why thay would want to get back to basics, but San Andreas spoiled us way too much! The massive map of SA was very frustrating to drive around and probably too big! But for flying around base jumping it was perfect, and just breath taking, i really miss the parachutes. Also, i actually don't mind that there is no planes in GTA4, by the time you actually take off and get the plane under control, you'd be at the end of the third island! I'm not saying GTA4 is small, just that it's too small for planes to have any real use. Lastly, I really hope to god R* don't put in friends/girlfriends in the next GTA, that bit nearly ruins the game. "No I do not want to play darts with you Roman, i'm in the middle of shooting up Clucking Bell!"

lol, yeah that's one of the real world simulation things I don't like about the game!

In the next game you'll have to go to the toilet at regular intervals and people will call you and you'll be faced with the awkward question of should you answer the phone when on the toilet!

Single Malt

brim4brim wrote: »

people will call you and you'll be faced with the awkward question of should you answer the phone when on the toilet!

Lol, you would only have yourself to blame though.