GTA Trilogy Remaster: GTA III, Vice City and San Andreas

RocketRaccoon

Are they reasonably playable yet?

I finished up 100% in San Andreas the other night before this latest patch and the crashes had gone and the rain was less frequent and less severe. Is it playable ? Yes. Is this definitively the best version of the game they could have made? No.

I fired up the PS 2 version afterwards for a drive around and OK the resolution is obviously significantly lower but I much preferred the over all look of it. NPC's seemed to talk more when out and about on the streets, it had sea gulls, the fog etc.

I though the new controls are OK but could be a lot better in terms of combat but I don't know how limited they were with what they could do there.

Would I have enjoyed a from the ground up remake with the same story and missions any more ? Probably not being honest, I'd probably enjoy them more with fully intact radio stations. That was another thing I found, it defaulted to the same 2 or maybe 3 radio stations when you get into a car. Usually either playback or KRose.

Some of the stations feel off, probably due to some edits that had to be done with host dialogue, Radio X being the one I noticed the most.

awec

Started into San Andreas, just about to finish the Los Santos missions. The rain bug is definitely fixed.

I was 15 when this originally came out and I definitely think I am picking up way more from it now than I did then. Back then a lot of the cultural references and slang used would have just gone over my head, now I definitely pick up more of the story and understand it.

That said, the missions themselves are so simple and basic, it's clear how far things have come since 2004. Drive from A to B, shoot person, drive back from B to A. Repeat over and over again.

The radio stations are unremarkable. The city itself feels fairly dead.

It's fun, but definitely a game that was better in my memory.

wotzgoingon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118448385#Comment_118448385

I also had rose tinted glasses back then. In my head it was one of the best games I ever played but since playing this remaster I don't see it.

I think it was because it was the largest game area of a game I had ever played. That's not really true any more.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118450434#Comment_118450434

The overly-large map was one of the reasons I loved VC more than SA. Too many times I'd get lost or stuck in the desert or forest where the car might have been destroyed and I end up having to just run to find roads (which would then be where the stamina system in the game would really start annoying me). It was a large map, but too empty.

Potential-Monke

In fairness, the train wreck of a "remaster" would melt any rose tinted glasses anyway. But that's the thing, it's a game from 2004 and still has the 2004 limitations. Simplistic design (compared to today) due to technical limitations. I'm glad I haven't played it, as they look worse than my memories of it.

It needed a remake, not a remaster.

jill_valentine

I highly recommend seeking out a chance to play the OG version if you can just to see, because a lot of these complaints don't sound like a rose-tinted glasses thing, they sound like stuff that was lost when the game was whittled down to the mobile version that was used as the basis of the remake (eg fewer peds, limited radio stations).

I have the old XBox version of San Andreas that I can play on a 360, and while it could be that I've been able to play it in the interim a bit more often than most, I think it's dated remarkably well. It's immersive enough that the oldschool graphics disappear very quickly.

Potential-Monke

Oh no doubt the originals are better, I played them when they came out, but I know myself my own rose tinted glasses wouldn't allow me to enjoy that release they "worked on". I can't play older games (save for the Legacy of Kain series) and nothing but a modern remaster would match my memory of it. One that requires effort, and not getting AI to do most of the work.

B.A._Baracus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118450434#Comment_118450434

I have a theory and that's games are like time capsules. A snapshot in time. You can look at something but not really appreciate it if you weren't around back then experiencing it.

Take mgs1, probably the best game of all time imo. But if I let my misses' nephew play it (he's 16) I know he will just see a game with bad graphics, awful controls... story might hold up? But he won't get it.

Even if I go back and play it am sure certain things will annoy me. Most likely not being able to aim in fps for starters.

Retr0gamer

A good game is a good game no matter how old it is. All games age but a good barometer of how good they are is how well they age. The GTA games were always jank and were trendsetters that have been outdone by other games polishing the model GTA set.

Stuff like Tetris, Super Mario Bros 3, Megaman 2 even Metal Gear Solid might have dated graphically but I still feel they are fantastic games that can be enjoyed by anyone as long as they can get over any prejudice of 'old graphics'. Dismissing games because they are old is like dismissing Citizen Kane or Casablanca because they are black and white.

awec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118466895#Comment_118466895

Even if they were accepting of the graphics, I think anyone picking up Metal Gear Solid today having never played it before would find the controls and camera angle ridiculous and would last about 5 minutes before turning it off.

Another game was great at the time but has aged horrendously.

Retr0gamer

The controls are fine though and the camera is top down. I mean if anything it's far less complex and easier to pick up than the more complex sequels.

Have to disagree and say it still holds up.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118467204#Comment_118467204

I think the controls are fine after a while, but to start off with it would definitely be jarring for new players who'd never played it before considering modern control systems etc. But I do think anyone going back to play MGS1 at this stage would probably be willing to accept that and power through for a while until it becomes more familiar.

johnny_ultimate

I think games age much faster and more severely than film. There's no real barrier to entry to watching an old film, other than just getting used to the different styles and technology of the time. You still just need to sit and watch it. But an old game may require you to basically rewire your brain and motor impulses after years of becoming adjusted to the much tidier control and mechanical language of the last decade or two.

Some games age much better than others and the best games will still shine even if you do need to readjust your brain to get the most out of them. But I think a lot of 3D games from the PS1 and PS2 era in particular are very, very hard to go back to for someone who doesn't frequently play retro games.

awec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118467204#Comment_118467204

The controls are mince and the camera is not really top down, it's sort of 45 degree fixed position.

Holding down square to aim etc, it was nuts.

Retr0gamer

I don't know. I mean Goldeneye is a game I'd say aged badly. Some of the level design is very meandering and it feels like you are walking through treacle.

MGS on the other hand in 8 directions, top down (it's basically top down as it mimics the MSX games), it runs at a mostly solid 30 FPS and even at the time the controls were a bit esoteric but I never had an issue with them after some experimentation. I really don't see how anyone couldn't still enjoy it as long as they didn't have an 'old games suck' prejudice going into it. I mean did anyone complain about MGS4 when it turned into MGS1?

wotzgoingon

I had more game time In SA yesterday evening a bit this evening and it's not that bad of a game. It is dated though as the cars handle like crap. I was doing a mission and was being chased by these guys on motorbikes and I drove two wheels onto a kerb and the car flipped and blew up. What is that about. I'm taking a break as I got to the mission where you need to stay under water for ages to get the lung capacity up so you can play the mission. Like what the hell is that about. Me under water and swimming back to surface and wait till he gets his breath back and then repeat. Why put that into a game. And it takes ages to build up his lung capacity. I only have a small bit of lung capacity done so far.

dreamers75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118466895#Comment_118466895

Body Harvest is the OG GTA3 *technically speaking*. It has not aged well, I loved that game but try play it nowadays even with Adaptoid N64 converter it has not aged well.

brady12

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118469631#Comment_118469631

i'm in the exact same spot in the story . a lot of the jank in the previous missions nearly made me stop playing . nothing more annoying then failing multiple missions because of the game and not myself .

awec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118471389#Comment_118471389

I still haven't figured out how to hit someone properly. Hit O and it just seems to swing in a random direction, it's infuriating.

Dr. Bre

The San Andreas map is so big that the remaster should have had fast travel

ClaudeVercetti

Finished this on switch but got a loan of a friends copy on Playstation to try and get the platinum trophies for each.

Replaying III now and I don't mind difficulty or grind trying to get them, but the fact that you have to do a good few missions in strategically sequenced steps so you don't accidentally trigger something that locks out other missions (or you don't miss a trophy because you didn't do a mission in a certain way) is really making me second guess this decision! 😂

Guess that's the legacy level design rearing it's head.

ClaudeVercetti

The paramedic missions in III are really testing my patience - each time I get to level 8 or 9 the ambulance glitches, shoots 500ft in the air and spins out of control. Giving me a 10 grand stunt bonus but costing me the mission as unfortunately the ambulance can't survive the impact on landing and explodes. This has happened about 4 times now 🤣

wotzgoingon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118496560#Comment_118496560

Mad. If it was GTA V the vehicle would survive the crash. That's one thing about this trilogy the vehicles blow up far too easy really annoying when trying to play the game.

ClaudeVercetti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118496617#Comment_118496617

Definitely. When I first heard these were being released I was hoping we'd get more physics and assets from more recent releases being used here. Still enjoy it even if it is making me question my sanity!

Manning3000

Wonder would anyone know when the GTA Trilogy will release its physical copy for the Nintendo Switch, My partner pre ordered it for me from Smyths but there is zero update from Rockstar or Smyths on the release just early 2022.

B.A._Baracus

Am on the last mission of gta3. Its too hard! Ugh. They take away all your weapons and you can't go toe to toe in a gun fight in this game. I remember the shooting being not great back in the day but it's just so annoying now.

You just get your ass handed to you if an enemy is anywhere close to you.... especially if they have a machine gun.

nullzero

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118507494#Comment_118507494

"Big tough Yankee boy".

"You want the chainsaw Gringo"?

"It's no problem to kill you".

"I'm going to keeeeel you".

Good times.

xckjoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118507494#Comment_118507494

Ya I had lots of restarts on that one. Only advice I can think of is to go left out the gate of the mansion to get to dam faster (for restarts) and keep distance from the bad guys once you get guns.

B.A._Baracus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118510577#Comment_118510577

Cheers for that.

Going that way I also noticed you can pick up a machine gun behind the houses and theres a sniper rifle as soon as you pass the gates to the dam. Made it a lot easier.