The GTA environment is TOO un-interactive. Granted, 5 came out in 2013 but even by then’s standards it is a really non-immersive world if you try to do anything other than shoot people and drive around. RDR2 really highlighted for me just how little there is to do in GTAV.
A lot of the missions in Grand Theft Auto IV (like for the McReary brothers and Phil Bell) feel like filler and slow the story way down.
Grand Theft Auto V had a nice fast pace and all the missions felt important to each character.
I completely agree with this take. In the 4 times I played through IV’s story, I always thought the Alderney chapter with the mafia was so boring and forgettable. It didn’t help that Pegorino as the antagonist in the revenge ending made him one of the worst GTA antagonists of all time. He was essentially the Stretch of GTA IV.
So true
4 has barely variety in missions wich makes it really boring to play after doing a replay.
Edit: and to add more. Its known for having a dark and gritty story but people can oversell it. There are only a handful of plot points where shit gets dark like the ending or Roman's kidnapping.
The majority the game is just Niko being hitman for other people.
I'm playing GTA IV for the first time these days and it *is* dark and gritty, from the color scheme to the story >!Roman’s house and taxi business was destroyed recently!<
I disagree. Franklin doesn’t seem like the kind of guy to just roll over to a couple of feds so killing Michael or Trevor doesn’t seem realistic cause he would never let Steve Haines pull one over on him.
Franklin also isn't the kind of guy to take down 2 government agency bosses, 1 private army and 2 mob bosses, all in one evening with his jolly old buddies. Of course, the targets are conveniently out in the open where you can pretty much snipe them (except Devin i guess), and Lester finds them just like that.
Even playing option C for the first time, the whole thing feels fan service-y . At the very least I was expecting one of the trio to be fatally wounded or something during the shooting.
Plus killing Trevor makes super sense, the psychotic cannibalistic mass murderer is a pretty safe bet to get himself and his gang in quite deep trouble in the future.
Story-wise it's also compelling in my opinion. Ending C feels too "and they were happy ever after once they defeated the big meanies". Ending A is compelling, even though Trevor is the most fucked up a large chunk of people feel weird for killing him, the guys like Devin and Steve are still out there, there is lingering bitterness between Franklin and Michael and the people around them regarding Trevor. It's just so much deeper than C.
GTA 5s car physics were designed so that 5 year olds can master it, its boring. In IV you had to get used to it and anticipate the behaviour of your car like you are driving one in real life.
This is how I feel. I don't hate V's driving but it's just boring as fuck. Gimme IV's all day, being chased by police or players in that game is a true test and you have to really know what the limits are.
Yeah sure it’s not totally realistic but a lot more than any other GTA game, especially the physics in the IV DLCs, they were slightly better than in the original game
Also, the dense traffic and small roads are intentionally designed that way and give the game this unique feeling. It really does feel like you are driving through a crowded and busy town (NYC) and you can easily lose time in a traffic jam on a major bridge or road. That’s much more immersive and entertaining than driving on empty, wide open roads in V.
Just getting into a taxi and looking at the city while driving through traffic, maybe even getting a call from a friend to arrange a hangout is sooo immersive to me in IV. V just didn’t really have this feeling for me
I feel you, V’s are way too arcadie for me. And IV’s is more realistic, that’s true, but still prefer because I play V more and only IV 2 or 3 times. I do like the vibe I guess of New York with all the lights with a lot of traffic but not a fan of traffic I just love going fast on a small traffic road or no traffic road.
Yeah I guess it really comes down to personal preference. I guess I’ll have to get into V again, haven’t played it for a long time and just finished another playthrough of IV, and I don’t even remember that much from Vs story anymore anyway
The mafia story in Alderney and Pegorino as an antagonist were so boring and forgettable.
Ray Bulgarin was a wasted and under-utilized character. He could’ve been Niko’s antagonist.
- GTA 5's story was good but the three protagonists thing makes it difficult for the players to fully appreciate it, which results in many players saying that it was boring.
- GTA 5's satirical aspect of its in-game media (radio/tv/ads/internet) is way over the top and feels out of place 70% of the time.
- GTA 5's wanted system is the worst in the series so far.
- GTA 4's driving physics wasn't that good. I mean, it's more realistic, sure. But, it feels like driving a boat rather than a car IMO. It's just too floaty.
I also hated the three character system, the game focuses on Michael more anyways. I'd have preffered if Franklin was the only protagonist and we see him rise through the criminal ranks like the PS2 games.
I guess the satirical aspect is playing on the general BS of California, but yeah it gets annoying.
The wanted system feels more like a weird mix of San Andreas/other 3d games wanted system and GTA 4's. Overall my main issue is how inconsistent the timer to escape is. Sometimes 2 stars feels like it takes 3 minutes to escape from, other times 4 stars feels like i escaped in 30 seconds (but this is usually only noticable when i jump over Fort Zancudo in a fast car)
But yeah Rockstar could have made the wanted system great, instead they went for a very artificial one where blowing up a car in the middle of nowhere still gets you wanted stars and cops will quickly get to your location. Killed a random hiker on Mt. Chiliad? 2 cop cruisers happened to be chilling somewhere on the trail and quickly got to your location. Oh and every pedestrian is a snitch, don't think you'll not get stars for killing one person only like in the old games.
But overall i'm still cool with the wanted system because it gives you a lot of ways to escape, RDR2 once again went for a more artificial one than RDR1's which seems to be a Rockstar trend, but atleast RDR2's was way better than GTA 5's. The illusion that the cops don't know where you are is done a lot better in RDR2. I was hiding in a bush after a heated gunfight with the Saint Denis cops while one passed by on his horse and i didn't get spotted, same thing cant be done in 5.
For your last point, every GTA game has great driving. Even GTA 4 is fun once you get used to the slow and slidey pace. Let's hope 6 car handling is a balanced one like SA, where it's not as 'realistic' as 4 but not as arcadey as 5 either. The driving is the one thing i expect to be good in a GTA game, i've played all the ones that aren't top down and haven't been disappointed so far, it's fun for me to steal the different cars and seeing how they handle and crashing them and stealing another one, the spirit of GTA.
More rant about the wanted level system in GTA 5: the fact that the cops will always know where you are 100% of the time is what makes it the worst in any Rockstar's titles. You can't confidently hide anywhere because the cops will know anyway.
Not to mention the fact that the game will always spawn a cop car in front of you just to cut you off is really annoying.
The game actually has a ton of hiding spots and other methods that work 100% of the time, usually tunnels are my go to. But i like losing the wanted level faster so i just enter a mod garage and respray which is instant escape as usual. And Online players can call up Lester.
Sometimes i've lost 2-3 stars by hiding behind a wall while cops are coming straight towards me, those kind of getaways are really adrenaline inducing.
When you first get a wanted level, i believe the game will start spawning cop cars 100 yards away in a random direction. This is why you keep running into cops and them cutting you off i think, unless you're talking about something else?
Also the AI in any game will always know where you are, what matters is how well the devs make the illusion that they dont know where you are hiding. for this reason stealth games are a lie! (No offense to stealth game enjoyers, i like metal gear solid)
I often get the cop spawning to cut me off when I'm in the "evading" state. It usually happens when I have 2 stars, but it doesn't really happen above that. I don't know why.
As a kid i hated it too, and GTA 5 brought back the fun. These days i see it as an interesting game, but still not one i would replay often or even come to waste time on the freeroam like i do in other GTA games.
Edit: happy cake day
Trevor shouldn’t have been playable in GTA V and his screen time should’ve been cut drastically. He could still be in the game, as a fan favourite side character that exists to flesh out Michael’s past and maybe getting a story DLC or something.
V’s map sucks. Not exactly badly designed but the way that only 50% of the map is barren wilderness is a disgrace considering how San Andreas was able to have such a great map 9 years prior.
the definitive editions weren’t *that* bad. Graphically they dropped the ball but controls wise it was great, and the checkpoints make the games actually playable for a newer audience.
GTA: CW's overall story isn't that bad albeit weak in some spots but the individual mission stories and dialogue is top notch when it comes to sheer enjoyment factor.
Not really that nuclear but I've only played CW fully and just started playing GTA 4 so I can't say that much.
I completely agree. It's a shorter game, so the missions can only do so much, but there's quite a lot of variety in missions. I'd consider it kind of like the "stories" games like VCS and LCS. They provide a mobile experience of the in-game universe while expanding the lore
Kill Michael is my favorite ending. I see it as Franklin slowly realising how much of a backstabbing snake Michael is throughout the story and deciding to take out the problem before he gets betrayed next.
Ending B is the "Good Ending". He stops being apart of the system where he's doing what he's told and with no payment, and he's still loyal to his friends (as seen by him calling up Lamar to hangout afterwards).
Trevor may be worse than Michael, but what Ending A means for Franklin is infinitely worse.
Here's a few!
I dislike GTA 4 and 3's grittier nature. GTA is best when it's a parody series. GTA was always a arcadey game, there's more games in the serious that are arcadey and parody than games that are dark and gritty.
Ending A in GTA 5 is the worst ending from a story standpoint. Ending B is the good ending. Ending C is, of course, the best ending. (I can explain why I think killing Trevor is the worst ending for Franklin if needed)
GTA Online isn't good. Not the hottest opinion in the world, but I know a few people who would heavily disagree.
Finally, GTA: San Andreas is barely a story about the hood. It is at first, but it derails so much that for the majority of the game CJ isn't even thinking about the hood. The very beginning and the very end of it is, but the majority of it is CJ doing odd jobs for anyone across San Andreas.
k rose is trash
GTA Advance is better than GTA 1
GTA4 driving isnt slidy or bad, you're just trash. Seriously, i once saw someone complain that turning is hard just for him to turn a corner at medium speed without handbrake.
time for my shitty take, rockstar didn't change in the late 20s, it was around gta 4, a huge step down from the previous entry in terms of almost every single thing,and gta V wasn't any better, it was just smoke and mirrors,appearing good on the outside,but is so empty of content and hollow on the inside it's worse than IV. rockstar peaked in SA and were walking backwards ever since.
Ending C should've resulted in Franklin's death, It would force the player to make a tough decision deciding which character to kill or sacrificing yourself for the group.
I see a good chunk of people saying they never cared for Johnny or just didn’t like him, but Johnny was met with immense upset when he was revealed as the DLC protag. Nobody cared about him in GTA 4’s story, and he just felt like edgy John Marston once Red Dead dropped.
Anyways, my nuclear take is the deal ending of GTA 4 is the better ending.
if he didn't fight to survive, he wouldn't have been the one who survived (according to him when talking to narco brevic) and therefor wouldnt be in lc looking for revenge
GTA SA has too much content and the story lasts for way too long. The map is huge but the driving mechanics are still a mess and the stats part just seems unnecessary for a GTA game. GTA V and Online handled it better.
Los Santos is good but frankly most of the map is empty and Blain County is quite boring. Liberty City was better and most streets always had something going on, and the city felt alive.
Speaking of GTA IV, TBoGT is everything that GTA IV could have been. It handles some important plotlines from GTA IV and EFLC while also having some of that whackiness and chaos, typical from GTA games. It has a better weapons selection and the 25 seagulls seemed much more reasonable than 200 pigeons, while having the ultimate vehicle selection and the ultimate designs for the characters.
Lastly, Lazlow had the biggest downfall since 2001, and people still give him radioshows and even a TV Show. It's incredible
I feel like people misunderstand the importance of the trio.
Outside of gameplay stuff where multiple characters mean that you can change vantage points and overall have better control of where you're firing at at a moment's notice, story wise I can't see it making sense without the full trio.
The main Story and message/theme it wants to portray can only been done with the trio.
Like, let's say we only play as Michael. This means
Lamar, someone integral to Franklin's story, is never even seen. Lamar is underused as is, but Michael doesn't meet Lamar until "Lamar Down".
But okay, let's say we add more missions so Michael is forced to do some of Franklin's missions with Franklin.
This, obviously mean, they rather need to make Franklin and Michael be good friends before they do in the game (I'd say Marriage Counseling is about the time they become real friends), or all of the missions fleshing out Lamar has to be after Trevor comes into the picture, which still fucks things up since some missions like "Reposession" and "Franklin and Lamar" cannot exist with Michael but give a lot of context to Lamar's and Franklin's relationship.
Okay, so, let's remove Lamar... Then Franklin's main motivation is gone. The main message the game wants Franklin to learn - to stay loyal to his friends - is now gone.
But let's look at Trevor. While he's foreshadowed a lot before hand, him suddenly appearing would be confusing for a lot of people. It makes no sense why he knows Michael is alive.
We could add dialogue or have Michael somehow come across him, which doesn't have the same impact and doesn't flesh out Trevor at all, but sure, let's go with it. Ignoring the fact that Trevor's first appearance, being Fame or Shame, would be the same mission where he hugs Tracey and automatically paints the wrong picture of him compared to him killing Johnny. But sure, let's do it.
And plenty of Trevor's missions outright can't have Michael in them without ruining Michael's character, but sure. Let's ignore that too.
And now Trevor and Franklin won't have any alone time, further cementing that the message the game wants Franklin to learn is further from the point-
Also, of course, the ending now can't be done, as Devin Weston wants Michael specifically dead. Maybe we could have him mad at Franklin? But then we'd need to completely remove his involvement in the film studio.
See my point? If we remove the trio as playable characters, it's no longer GTA 5. It might have a few missions be the same, but the majority of the expirence would be worse or completely changed.
GTA IV is the best one in the series by far and it's expansions turned it into a masterpiece. GTA V story mode was a response to a lot of the critism 4 received and was dumbed down a lot in the process, like how Trevor kills Johnny immediately or how you have next to no interaction with the traditional criminal underworld as you did in previous GTA's.
GTA 4 is the best gta, and the older ones are only “good” because of nostalgia, otherwise trying to play them today they’re overall garbage, and 5 is worse than 4 and San Andreas. Can’t WAIT to see the replies 😂
Why do little kids always say skill issue 💀💀 it literally doesn’t even make any sense lol, also what does “it feels nice to play on pc” even mean 😂 it’s just very outdated, maybe in 2004 it was great ( obviously) but it barely holds up at all and it’s not worth playing over many other games. Also gta 4 had the best story and Gameplay, all the mechanics and such were far better than what we’ve had or even got with gta 5, it’s just bots apparently couldn’t handle not being able to perfectly turn a corner at 100mph since cars in gta 4 acted like cars and not bricks glued to the road by magic. There’s a reason gta 6 is implementing some of the gta 4 style mechanics and such.
I find CJ and the entire gang/cop aspect to San Andreas to be so cringeworthy. He's not only a unlikable lead (his constant whining and complaining is irksome, same for the awful catchphrases,) oh fo sho! But he's a total wimp and a goof ball and it's hard to take him seriously. Game woulda been better if Sweet or even Caesar had been the lead.
Caesar coulda been an incredible lead. A hard working and decently loyal guy caught between two gangs for the love of his life and then add to it he gets betrayed by both gangs out of nowhere. As a result you have to start your own way and ride it to the end.. either by forming a new gang in their mold or doing what Vercetti did and absorb everyone else. That woulda been a lot better.
Cop wise I also find all their drama to be overkill. They do all they can do to make Tenpenny obnoxious which fails because it's Sam Jackson, then there's Chris Penn who works way too well in his role. They still coulda have included in my theorized game but honestly it just forces in too much into the already deep game we got imo.
Agree with this it's story was mid and downright depressing at times, they were in on the Breaking Bad memes 10 years early so that's a bonus for them I guess
lol at people downvoting a hot take in a thread asking for hot takes.
Also please note I never said 5 was bad, I just think it was less good than 3, VC, SA, and 4. People are goofy.
They all have different criminal minds Michael is not too crazy but will kill Trevor is crazy and will do some more evil things then Micheal frank is like both but the peace he’s crazy and calm here’s my hot take sorry it’s a long one
Gta 5 should have ended with the big one heist. The antagonists should have been killed before it.
Rob the antagonists
The big one heist SUCKS it should be something huge but no it's easy and not impressive
No one gives a shit about Johnny
People only enjoy TLAD because we know that Johnny dies
Finally, an actual hot take
I finished tlad and enjoyed it not knowing Johnny will die idk
Have you played GTA V yet?
Yea twice, but played tlad before V
Genuinely such a mid protagonist, I felt zero remorse when he died.
I’d still put Claude and Toni as the most “evil” protagonists but Johnny and the Lost were absolute scumbags as well.
True. Kind of a mid protagonist but he was badass and liked bikes so it's a shame he died
What made him badass aside from his appearance?
Bikes
Understandable.
Johnny got what he deserved
he didn't deserve it, but he had it coming.
You literally said "he didn't deserve it, but he deserve it"
The GTA environment is TOO un-interactive. Granted, 5 came out in 2013 but even by then’s standards it is a really non-immersive world if you try to do anything other than shoot people and drive around. RDR2 really highlighted for me just how little there is to do in GTAV.
That's because 5 was a cross Gen game it had to run on the ps3 so they were severely limited in what they could actually do.
A lot of the missions in Grand Theft Auto IV (like for the McReary brothers and Phil Bell) feel like filler and slow the story way down. Grand Theft Auto V had a nice fast pace and all the missions felt important to each character.
I completely agree with this take. In the 4 times I played through IV’s story, I always thought the Alderney chapter with the mafia was so boring and forgettable. It didn’t help that Pegorino as the antagonist in the revenge ending made him one of the worst GTA antagonists of all time. He was essentially the Stretch of GTA IV.
Dimitri should have been the main antagonist of the entire game. At least Devon Weston and Steve Haines are for their respective game.
So true 4 has barely variety in missions wich makes it really boring to play after doing a replay. Edit: and to add more. Its known for having a dark and gritty story but people can oversell it. There are only a handful of plot points where shit gets dark like the ending or Roman's kidnapping. The majority the game is just Niko being hitman for other people.
GTA was better when it was dark and gritty and not trying to be a parody of everything. I loved being a psychopath and going on rampages in GTA 3.
i kinda like the goofiness sometimes but its everywhere all the time and that kinda ruins gta5. still great game though.
dark and griddy
I'm playing GTA IV for the first time these days and it *is* dark and gritty, from the color scheme to the story >!Roman’s house and taxi business was destroyed recently!<
GTA 5: Ending A is the most realistic, Ending C is the most fun
I disagree. Franklin doesn’t seem like the kind of guy to just roll over to a couple of feds so killing Michael or Trevor doesn’t seem realistic cause he would never let Steve Haines pull one over on him.
Franklin also isn't the kind of guy to take down 2 government agency bosses, 1 private army and 2 mob bosses, all in one evening with his jolly old buddies. Of course, the targets are conveniently out in the open where you can pretty much snipe them (except Devin i guess), and Lester finds them just like that. Even playing option C for the first time, the whole thing feels fan service-y . At the very least I was expecting one of the trio to be fatally wounded or something during the shooting. Plus killing Trevor makes super sense, the psychotic cannibalistic mass murderer is a pretty safe bet to get himself and his gang in quite deep trouble in the future. Story-wise it's also compelling in my opinion. Ending C feels too "and they were happy ever after once they defeated the big meanies". Ending A is compelling, even though Trevor is the most fucked up a large chunk of people feel weird for killing him, the guys like Devin and Steve are still out there, there is lingering bitterness between Franklin and Michael and the people around them regarding Trevor. It's just so much deeper than C.
GTA IV car physics are ass they’re way too slidey. And when you turn car it’s way too exaggerated. V’s is a bit too Arcadie but still better.
GTA 5s car physics were designed so that 5 year olds can master it, its boring. In IV you had to get used to it and anticipate the behaviour of your car like you are driving one in real life.
This is how I feel. I don't hate V's driving but it's just boring as fuck. Gimme IV's all day, being chased by police or players in that game is a true test and you have to really know what the limits are.
But real cars don’t lean when turning that much. Plus with the smaller roads is a nightmare.
Yeah sure it’s not totally realistic but a lot more than any other GTA game, especially the physics in the IV DLCs, they were slightly better than in the original game Also, the dense traffic and small roads are intentionally designed that way and give the game this unique feeling. It really does feel like you are driving through a crowded and busy town (NYC) and you can easily lose time in a traffic jam on a major bridge or road. That’s much more immersive and entertaining than driving on empty, wide open roads in V. Just getting into a taxi and looking at the city while driving through traffic, maybe even getting a call from a friend to arrange a hangout is sooo immersive to me in IV. V just didn’t really have this feeling for me
I feel you, V’s are way too arcadie for me. And IV’s is more realistic, that’s true, but still prefer because I play V more and only IV 2 or 3 times. I do like the vibe I guess of New York with all the lights with a lot of traffic but not a fan of traffic I just love going fast on a small traffic road or no traffic road.
Yeah I guess it really comes down to personal preference. I guess I’ll have to get into V again, haven’t played it for a long time and just finished another playthrough of IV, and I don’t even remember that much from Vs story anymore anyway
Yea it’s just preference. Definitely play V again it’s good.
The mafia story in Alderney and Pegorino as an antagonist were so boring and forgettable. Ray Bulgarin was a wasted and under-utilized character. He could’ve been Niko’s antagonist.
Gta 5 is very boring
Would be nicer if there was more interiors
Absolutely.
AGREED.
Fr
- GTA 5's story was good but the three protagonists thing makes it difficult for the players to fully appreciate it, which results in many players saying that it was boring. - GTA 5's satirical aspect of its in-game media (radio/tv/ads/internet) is way over the top and feels out of place 70% of the time. - GTA 5's wanted system is the worst in the series so far. - GTA 4's driving physics wasn't that good. I mean, it's more realistic, sure. But, it feels like driving a boat rather than a car IMO. It's just too floaty.
Don't you dare talk shit about CHAKRA ATTACK. I'd die on this hill
I'll give Chakra Attack a pass. It's too good to diss.
Hmmmmm right back at ya brotha
I also hated the three character system, the game focuses on Michael more anyways. I'd have preffered if Franklin was the only protagonist and we see him rise through the criminal ranks like the PS2 games. I guess the satirical aspect is playing on the general BS of California, but yeah it gets annoying. The wanted system feels more like a weird mix of San Andreas/other 3d games wanted system and GTA 4's. Overall my main issue is how inconsistent the timer to escape is. Sometimes 2 stars feels like it takes 3 minutes to escape from, other times 4 stars feels like i escaped in 30 seconds (but this is usually only noticable when i jump over Fort Zancudo in a fast car) But yeah Rockstar could have made the wanted system great, instead they went for a very artificial one where blowing up a car in the middle of nowhere still gets you wanted stars and cops will quickly get to your location. Killed a random hiker on Mt. Chiliad? 2 cop cruisers happened to be chilling somewhere on the trail and quickly got to your location. Oh and every pedestrian is a snitch, don't think you'll not get stars for killing one person only like in the old games. But overall i'm still cool with the wanted system because it gives you a lot of ways to escape, RDR2 once again went for a more artificial one than RDR1's which seems to be a Rockstar trend, but atleast RDR2's was way better than GTA 5's. The illusion that the cops don't know where you are is done a lot better in RDR2. I was hiding in a bush after a heated gunfight with the Saint Denis cops while one passed by on his horse and i didn't get spotted, same thing cant be done in 5. For your last point, every GTA game has great driving. Even GTA 4 is fun once you get used to the slow and slidey pace. Let's hope 6 car handling is a balanced one like SA, where it's not as 'realistic' as 4 but not as arcadey as 5 either. The driving is the one thing i expect to be good in a GTA game, i've played all the ones that aren't top down and haven't been disappointed so far, it's fun for me to steal the different cars and seeing how they handle and crashing them and stealing another one, the spirit of GTA.
More rant about the wanted level system in GTA 5: the fact that the cops will always know where you are 100% of the time is what makes it the worst in any Rockstar's titles. You can't confidently hide anywhere because the cops will know anyway. Not to mention the fact that the game will always spawn a cop car in front of you just to cut you off is really annoying.
The game actually has a ton of hiding spots and other methods that work 100% of the time, usually tunnels are my go to. But i like losing the wanted level faster so i just enter a mod garage and respray which is instant escape as usual. And Online players can call up Lester. Sometimes i've lost 2-3 stars by hiding behind a wall while cops are coming straight towards me, those kind of getaways are really adrenaline inducing. When you first get a wanted level, i believe the game will start spawning cop cars 100 yards away in a random direction. This is why you keep running into cops and them cutting you off i think, unless you're talking about something else? Also the AI in any game will always know where you are, what matters is how well the devs make the illusion that they dont know where you are hiding. for this reason stealth games are a lie! (No offense to stealth game enjoyers, i like metal gear solid)
I often get the cop spawning to cut me off when I'm in the "evading" state. It usually happens when I have 2 stars, but it doesn't really happen above that. I don't know why.
What GTA games have you played? In my experience, the 2D and 3D era games have worse wanted system than 5, although 4 is better
3, VC, SA, IV, V
No way 3 has a better wanted system than 5
GTA IV nearly killed my interest in the entire franchise
As a kid i hated it too, and GTA 5 brought back the fun. These days i see it as an interesting game, but still not one i would replay often or even come to waste time on the freeroam like i do in other GTA games. Edit: happy cake day
GTA 2 is the best in the series in terms of absolute wackiness, brutality unrealism, and probably fun.
You might like Saints Row games
GTA IV story is mid.
Trevor shouldn’t have been playable in GTA V and his screen time should’ve been cut drastically. He could still be in the game, as a fan favourite side character that exists to flesh out Michael’s past and maybe getting a story DLC or something. V’s map sucks. Not exactly badly designed but the way that only 50% of the map is barren wilderness is a disgrace considering how San Andreas was able to have such a great map 9 years prior. the definitive editions weren’t *that* bad. Graphically they dropped the ball but controls wise it was great, and the checkpoints make the games actually playable for a newer audience.
GTA Vice City is the best one
GTA: CW's overall story isn't that bad albeit weak in some spots but the individual mission stories and dialogue is top notch when it comes to sheer enjoyment factor. Not really that nuclear but I've only played CW fully and just started playing GTA 4 so I can't say that much.
I completely agree. It's a shorter game, so the missions can only do so much, but there's quite a lot of variety in missions. I'd consider it kind of like the "stories" games like VCS and LCS. They provide a mobile experience of the in-game universe while expanding the lore
Kill Michael is my favorite ending. I see it as Franklin slowly realising how much of a backstabbing snake Michael is throughout the story and deciding to take out the problem before he gets betrayed next.
Ending B is the "Good Ending". He stops being apart of the system where he's doing what he's told and with no payment, and he's still loyal to his friends (as seen by him calling up Lamar to hangout afterwards). Trevor may be worse than Michael, but what Ending A means for Franklin is infinitely worse.
GTA 4 is the best one ever made. Edit: hopefully til 6.
Very hot 🔥
TBGT > TLAD > IV
GTA 3 is the best, with 5 on second place
Gta 4 is terrible
Here's a few! I dislike GTA 4 and 3's grittier nature. GTA is best when it's a parody series. GTA was always a arcadey game, there's more games in the serious that are arcadey and parody than games that are dark and gritty. Ending A in GTA 5 is the worst ending from a story standpoint. Ending B is the good ending. Ending C is, of course, the best ending. (I can explain why I think killing Trevor is the worst ending for Franklin if needed) GTA Online isn't good. Not the hottest opinion in the world, but I know a few people who would heavily disagree. Finally, GTA: San Andreas is barely a story about the hood. It is at first, but it derails so much that for the majority of the game CJ isn't even thinking about the hood. The very beginning and the very end of it is, but the majority of it is CJ doing odd jobs for anyone across San Andreas.
The Last one isnt even a take, its a fact
The physics in 4 >>>>>>> every other game
Gta online 1 aka 4 online was better than V's online
Johnny Klebitz is not a mid character as this subreddit specifically claims. Claude and Toni are mid as fuck.
LLLLLL, claude has incredible aura.
CJ is not that strong
Driving in GTA SA > Driving in GTA 4
k rose is trash GTA Advance is better than GTA 1 GTA4 driving isnt slidy or bad, you're just trash. Seriously, i once saw someone complain that turning is hard just for him to turn a corner at medium speed without handbrake.
time for my shitty take, rockstar didn't change in the late 20s, it was around gta 4, a huge step down from the previous entry in terms of almost every single thing,and gta V wasn't any better, it was just smoke and mirrors,appearing good on the outside,but is so empty of content and hollow on the inside it's worse than IV. rockstar peaked in SA and were walking backwards ever since.
Ending C should've resulted in Franklin's death, It would force the player to make a tough decision deciding which character to kill or sacrificing yourself for the group.
I see a good chunk of people saying they never cared for Johnny or just didn’t like him, but Johnny was met with immense upset when he was revealed as the DLC protag. Nobody cared about him in GTA 4’s story, and he just felt like edgy John Marston once Red Dead dropped. Anyways, my nuclear take is the deal ending of GTA 4 is the better ending.
the plot of GTA IV is Niko’s fault
What exactly do you mean by that?
if he didn't fight to survive, he wouldn't have been the one who survived (according to him when talking to narco brevic) and therefor wouldnt be in lc looking for revenge
But how does this make it his fault, he was betrayed
idk but its either that or the fact that he killed vlad
True, killing Vlad makes sense, wouldn’t have met Dimitri
Gta 4's driving physics isn't realistic at all
Just because gta 4's driving is "realistic" (which it isn't) doesn't make it good. It fucking sucks.
GTA SA has too much content and the story lasts for way too long. The map is huge but the driving mechanics are still a mess and the stats part just seems unnecessary for a GTA game. GTA V and Online handled it better. Los Santos is good but frankly most of the map is empty and Blain County is quite boring. Liberty City was better and most streets always had something going on, and the city felt alive. Speaking of GTA IV, TBoGT is everything that GTA IV could have been. It handles some important plotlines from GTA IV and EFLC while also having some of that whackiness and chaos, typical from GTA games. It has a better weapons selection and the 25 seagulls seemed much more reasonable than 200 pigeons, while having the ultimate vehicle selection and the ultimate designs for the characters. Lastly, Lazlow had the biggest downfall since 2001, and people still give him radioshows and even a TV Show. It's incredible
I'd die before I say gta 5 and online handled any single thing better than san andreas, really nuclear take here.
Michael should've been the only protagonist in V. Trevor and Franklin could have worked just fine as supporting characters.
I feel like people misunderstand the importance of the trio. Outside of gameplay stuff where multiple characters mean that you can change vantage points and overall have better control of where you're firing at at a moment's notice, story wise I can't see it making sense without the full trio. The main Story and message/theme it wants to portray can only been done with the trio. Like, let's say we only play as Michael. This means Lamar, someone integral to Franklin's story, is never even seen. Lamar is underused as is, but Michael doesn't meet Lamar until "Lamar Down". But okay, let's say we add more missions so Michael is forced to do some of Franklin's missions with Franklin. This, obviously mean, they rather need to make Franklin and Michael be good friends before they do in the game (I'd say Marriage Counseling is about the time they become real friends), or all of the missions fleshing out Lamar has to be after Trevor comes into the picture, which still fucks things up since some missions like "Reposession" and "Franklin and Lamar" cannot exist with Michael but give a lot of context to Lamar's and Franklin's relationship. Okay, so, let's remove Lamar... Then Franklin's main motivation is gone. The main message the game wants Franklin to learn - to stay loyal to his friends - is now gone. But let's look at Trevor. While he's foreshadowed a lot before hand, him suddenly appearing would be confusing for a lot of people. It makes no sense why he knows Michael is alive. We could add dialogue or have Michael somehow come across him, which doesn't have the same impact and doesn't flesh out Trevor at all, but sure, let's go with it. Ignoring the fact that Trevor's first appearance, being Fame or Shame, would be the same mission where he hugs Tracey and automatically paints the wrong picture of him compared to him killing Johnny. But sure, let's do it. And plenty of Trevor's missions outright can't have Michael in them without ruining Michael's character, but sure. Let's ignore that too. And now Trevor and Franklin won't have any alone time, further cementing that the message the game wants Franklin to learn is further from the point- Also, of course, the ending now can't be done, as Devin Weston wants Michael specifically dead. Maybe we could have him mad at Franklin? But then we'd need to completely remove his involvement in the film studio. See my point? If we remove the trio as playable characters, it's no longer GTA 5. It might have a few missions be the same, but the majority of the expirence would be worse or completely changed.
GTA IV is the best one in the series by far and it's expansions turned it into a masterpiece. GTA V story mode was a response to a lot of the critism 4 received and was dumbed down a lot in the process, like how Trevor kills Johnny immediately or how you have next to no interaction with the traditional criminal underworld as you did in previous GTA's.
san andreas has the worst story in the 3d universe and 5's missions are more boring and repetitive than 4's
Have to disagree,V's missions had more variety than IV's.Sure it wasnt always fun but in IV it was always drive there and shoot someone
GTA 4 is the best gta, and the older ones are only “good” because of nostalgia, otherwise trying to play them today they’re overall garbage, and 5 is worse than 4 and San Andreas. Can’t WAIT to see the replies 😂
Skill issue lol. San Andreas on pc feels nice to play. And gta 4's story really carried the boring repetitive gameplay it had.
Why do little kids always say skill issue 💀💀 it literally doesn’t even make any sense lol, also what does “it feels nice to play on pc” even mean 😂 it’s just very outdated, maybe in 2004 it was great ( obviously) but it barely holds up at all and it’s not worth playing over many other games. Also gta 4 had the best story and Gameplay, all the mechanics and such were far better than what we’ve had or even got with gta 5, it’s just bots apparently couldn’t handle not being able to perfectly turn a corner at 100mph since cars in gta 4 acted like cars and not bricks glued to the road by magic. There’s a reason gta 6 is implementing some of the gta 4 style mechanics and such.
GTA V is the worst main entry in the HD universe, not even really that close if I'm honest.
HD universe
Yeah that's what I meant
I find CJ and the entire gang/cop aspect to San Andreas to be so cringeworthy. He's not only a unlikable lead (his constant whining and complaining is irksome, same for the awful catchphrases,) oh fo sho! But he's a total wimp and a goof ball and it's hard to take him seriously. Game woulda been better if Sweet or even Caesar had been the lead. Caesar coulda been an incredible lead. A hard working and decently loyal guy caught between two gangs for the love of his life and then add to it he gets betrayed by both gangs out of nowhere. As a result you have to start your own way and ride it to the end.. either by forming a new gang in their mold or doing what Vercetti did and absorb everyone else. That woulda been a lot better. Cop wise I also find all their drama to be overkill. They do all they can do to make Tenpenny obnoxious which fails because it's Sam Jackson, then there's Chris Penn who works way too well in his role. They still coulda have included in my theorized game but honestly it just forces in too much into the already deep game we got imo.
GTA 5 is thé worst entry in the series since 2.
Agree with this it's story was mid and downright depressing at times, they were in on the Breaking Bad memes 10 years early so that's a bonus for them I guess
the worst thing was the empty and not interrective world, it sometimes feels like a demo.
lol at people downvoting a hot take in a thread asking for hot takes. Also please note I never said 5 was bad, I just think it was less good than 3, VC, SA, and 4. People are goofy.
TLAD Is The Best DLC (Including GTAO Updates)
They all have different criminal minds Michael is not too crazy but will kill Trevor is crazy and will do some more evil things then Micheal frank is like both but the peace he’s crazy and calm here’s my hot take sorry it’s a long one