Conquer Club

Gta 5

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Gta 5

Postby Army of GOD on Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:44 pm

I guess my biggest problems for 4 are: (1) realistic driving. I don't fucking want realistic driving. Half of the fun of San Andreas/Vice City was the exquisitely fantastical driving. I love doing 100mph and then pulling a fishtail 180 out of my ass. (2) the setting. I mean...for some reason I wasn't a huge fan of Liberty City in 4. I loved it in GTA 3...but 4 seemed too bland. San Andreas allowed for much more variation, which I hope they touch in GTA 5.
mrswdk is a ho
User avatar
Lieutenant Army of GOD
 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Gta 5

Postby xeno on Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:27 am

Army of GOD wrote:I guess my biggest problems for 4 are: (1) realistic driving. I don't fucking want realistic driving. Half of the fun of San Andreas/Vice City was the exquisitely fantastical driving. I love doing 100mph and then pulling a fishtail 180 out of my ass. (2) the setting. I mean...for some reason I wasn't a huge fan of Liberty City in 4. I loved it in GTA 3...but 4 seemed too bland. San Andreas allowed for much more variation, which I hope they touch in GTA 5.

Driving did take a step back come to think of it! I could still drive around bone county listening to freebird on kdust. Such a good soundtrack from top to bottom. The story was bad in 4 btw. I couldn't finish it.
Image
User avatar
Private 1st Class xeno
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Colbert Nation

Re: Gta 5

Postby tkr4lf on Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:53 am

Army of GOD wrote:I guess my biggest problems for 4 are: (1) realistic driving. I don't fucking want realistic driving. Half of the fun of San Andreas/Vice City was the exquisitely fantastical driving. I love doing 100mph and then pulling a fishtail 180 out of my ass. (2) the setting. I mean...for some reason I wasn't a huge fan of Liberty City in 4. I loved it in GTA 3...but 4 seemed too bland. San Andreas allowed for much more variation, which I hope they touch in GTA 5.


xeno wrote:Driving did take a step back come to think of it! I could still drive around bone county listening to freebird on kdust. Such a good soundtrack from top to bottom. The story was bad in 4 btw. I couldn't finish it.


Fair enough. The driving was more realistic, which was a bit less fun. The setting, well, I guess that's just a preference thing. I mean, don't get me wrong, I loved the setting for SA, but I also loved the setting for 4. I like that they made it more like New York City in 4.

Either way, they're both great games. SA still is king, though. There's nothing like flying that military jet around shooting missiles at random cars, then going as high as you possibly can and parachuting out into Las Venturas to go bet $500,000 on a single roulette spin.

And yeah, the soundtrack for SA was the best. I don't think they'll ever beat that.

Anyway, looking forward to 5. I'm sure it will be good. Hopefully they go back to Vice City in the next one. It would be cool to revisit that setting with it being updated the way the other settings have been/ are being done.




CBlake wrote:Lol you guys are dumb, I open the box and beat the shit out of the story mode, then I play free roam (Which you do alone) with my friends, I can see how I am ruining the game :roll:

It's not that you personally are ruining the single-player game.

It's the fact that there are players out there that prefer and want multi-player aspects, which forces developers to devote time that could otherwise be spent making the single-player experience even better. It's a waste of developer time and money that could be much better used.

Take GTA:IV for example. Many people have a problem with some aspects of the single player game. Now imagine that there was no multi-player and all the time and money spent developing that was instead put into the single-player game. I would imagine that it would be twice as good as it is now. More features, more story, possibly more DLC, etc. Instead that manpower was put into the multi-player experience.

I guess I don't get the drive for multi-player. Since when was gaming all about multi-player? If you want to do stuff with friends, go do stuff with friends. If you want to play a video game, then sit in your room and play a video game. Why do those two activities have to be combined?

Personally I value my alone time spent playing video games. I enjoy hanging out with my friends, but often times I want to escape from other people. That's what video games are great for. Anyway...enough about that.
User avatar
Major tkr4lf
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:35 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: Gta 5

Postby Army of GOD on Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:58 am

I'm hoping that 5 will be not only the best-looking GTA but the most massive and most diverse...pretty much SA 2.0.

Also, even though a lot of the GTAs have been "be a mercenary for other gangs", I loved SA's "be a motherfucking gang member". GROVE STREET 4 LYFE
mrswdk is a ho
User avatar
Lieutenant Army of GOD
 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Gta 5

Postby CBlake on Sat Feb 23, 2013 12:36 pm

tkr4lf wrote:
Army of GOD wrote:I guess my biggest problems for 4 are: (1) realistic driving. I don't fucking want realistic driving. Half of the fun of San Andreas/Vice City was the exquisitely fantastical driving. I love doing 100mph and then pulling a fishtail 180 out of my ass. (2) the setting. I mean...for some reason I wasn't a huge fan of Liberty City in 4. I loved it in GTA 3...but 4 seemed too bland. San Andreas allowed for much more variation, which I hope they touch in GTA 5.


xeno wrote:Driving did take a step back come to think of it! I could still drive around bone county listening to freebird on kdust. Such a good soundtrack from top to bottom. The story was bad in 4 btw. I couldn't finish it.


Fair enough. The driving was more realistic, which was a bit less fun. The setting, well, I guess that's just a preference thing. I mean, don't get me wrong, I loved the setting for SA, but I also loved the setting for 4. I like that they made it more like New York City in 4.

Either way, they're both great games. SA still is king, though. There's nothing like flying that military jet around shooting missiles at random cars, then going as high as you possibly can and parachuting out into Las Venturas to go bet $500,000 on a single roulette spin.

And yeah, the soundtrack for SA was the best. I don't think they'll ever beat that.

Anyway, looking forward to 5. I'm sure it will be good. Hopefully they go back to Vice City in the next one. It would be cool to revisit that setting with it being updated the way the other settings have been/ are being done.




CBlake wrote:Lol you guys are dumb, I open the box and beat the shit out of the story mode, then I play free roam (Which you do alone) with my friends, I can see how I am ruining the game :roll:

It's not that you personally are ruining the single-player game.

It's the fact that there are players out there that prefer and want multi-player aspects, which forces developers to devote time that could otherwise be spent making the single-player experience even better. It's a waste of developer time and money that could be much better used.

Take GTA:IV for example. Many people have a problem with some aspects of the single player game. Now imagine that there was no multi-player and all the time and money spent developing that was instead put into the single-player game. I would imagine that it would be twice as good as it is now. More features, more story, possibly more DLC, etc. Instead that manpower was put into the multi-player experience.

I guess I don't get the drive for multi-player. Since when was gaming all about multi-player? If you want to do stuff with friends, go do stuff with friends. If you want to play a video game, then sit in your room and play a video game. Why do those two activities have to be combined?

Personally I value my alone time spent playing video games. I enjoy hanging out with my friends, but often times I want to escape from other people. That's what video games are great for. Anyway...enough about that.


Its actually money well spent and their sales are much higher because the online community for this game is high. It would make no since to devote no time to multiplayer because their sales would plummet. Honestly how many games today don't have some kind of multiplayer? The answer is not many, that is what people want and the game developers have to adapt to that. This isn't 2004 anymore.
dcowboys055 wrote:The alaska PD pwned you brian.
User avatar
Captain CBlake
 
Posts: 2223
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Where the wild things are

Re: Gta 5

Postby tkr4lf on Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:37 pm

CBlake wrote:
tkr4lf wrote:
Army of GOD wrote:I guess my biggest problems for 4 are: (1) realistic driving. I don't fucking want realistic driving. Half of the fun of San Andreas/Vice City was the exquisitely fantastical driving. I love doing 100mph and then pulling a fishtail 180 out of my ass. (2) the setting. I mean...for some reason I wasn't a huge fan of Liberty City in 4. I loved it in GTA 3...but 4 seemed too bland. San Andreas allowed for much more variation, which I hope they touch in GTA 5.


xeno wrote:Driving did take a step back come to think of it! I could still drive around bone county listening to freebird on kdust. Such a good soundtrack from top to bottom. The story was bad in 4 btw. I couldn't finish it.


Fair enough. The driving was more realistic, which was a bit less fun. The setting, well, I guess that's just a preference thing. I mean, don't get me wrong, I loved the setting for SA, but I also loved the setting for 4. I like that they made it more like New York City in 4.

Either way, they're both great games. SA still is king, though. There's nothing like flying that military jet around shooting missiles at random cars, then going as high as you possibly can and parachuting out into Las Venturas to go bet $500,000 on a single roulette spin.

And yeah, the soundtrack for SA was the best. I don't think they'll ever beat that.

Anyway, looking forward to 5. I'm sure it will be good. Hopefully they go back to Vice City in the next one. It would be cool to revisit that setting with it being updated the way the other settings have been/ are being done.




CBlake wrote:Lol you guys are dumb, I open the box and beat the shit out of the story mode, then I play free roam (Which you do alone) with my friends, I can see how I am ruining the game :roll:

It's not that you personally are ruining the single-player game.

It's the fact that there are players out there that prefer and want multi-player aspects, which forces developers to devote time that could otherwise be spent making the single-player experience even better. It's a waste of developer time and money that could be much better used.

Take GTA:IV for example. Many people have a problem with some aspects of the single player game. Now imagine that there was no multi-player and all the time and money spent developing that was instead put into the single-player game. I would imagine that it would be twice as good as it is now. More features, more story, possibly more DLC, etc. Instead that manpower was put into the multi-player experience.

I guess I don't get the drive for multi-player. Since when was gaming all about multi-player? If you want to do stuff with friends, go do stuff with friends. If you want to play a video game, then sit in your room and play a video game. Why do those two activities have to be combined?

Personally I value my alone time spent playing video games. I enjoy hanging out with my friends, but often times I want to escape from other people. That's what video games are great for. Anyway...enough about that.


Its actually money well spent and their sales are much higher because the online community for this game is high. It would make no since to devote no time to multiplayer because their sales would plummet. Honestly how many games today don't have some kind of multiplayer? The answer is not many, that is what people want and the game developers have to adapt to that. This isn't 2004 anymore.

Fucking kids today and your multiplayer gaming.
User avatar
Major tkr4lf
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:35 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: Gta 5

Postby tkr4lf on Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:39 pm

Army of GOD wrote:I'm hoping that 5 will be not only the best-looking GTA but the most massive and most diverse...pretty much SA 2.0.

Also, even though a lot of the GTAs have been "be a mercenary for other gangs", I loved SA's "be a motherfucking gang member". GROVE STREET 4 LYFE

From what I heard, it doesn't include any of the San Fierro or Las Venturas areas, which kind of sucks. I guess it's just Los Santos and the surrounding areas, but I don't know for sure.

And yeah, the Grove was bomb. Big Smoke was the coolest villain in any of the games.
User avatar
Major tkr4lf
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:35 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: Gta 5

Postby xeno on Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:40 pm

tkr4lf wrote:
CBlake wrote:
tkr4lf wrote:
Army of GOD wrote:I guess my biggest problems for 4 are: (1) realistic driving. I don't fucking want realistic driving. Half of the fun of San Andreas/Vice City was the exquisitely fantastical driving. I love doing 100mph and then pulling a fishtail 180 out of my ass. (2) the setting. I mean...for some reason I wasn't a huge fan of Liberty City in 4. I loved it in GTA 3...but 4 seemed too bland. San Andreas allowed for much more variation, which I hope they touch in GTA 5.


xeno wrote:Driving did take a step back come to think of it! I could still drive around bone county listening to freebird on kdust. Such a good soundtrack from top to bottom. The story was bad in 4 btw. I couldn't finish it.


Fair enough. The driving was more realistic, which was a bit less fun. The setting, well, I guess that's just a preference thing. I mean, don't get me wrong, I loved the setting for SA, but I also loved the setting for 4. I like that they made it more like New York City in 4.

Either way, they're both great games. SA still is king, though. There's nothing like flying that military jet around shooting missiles at random cars, then going as high as you possibly can and parachuting out into Las Venturas to go bet $500,000 on a single roulette spin.

And yeah, the soundtrack for SA was the best. I don't think they'll ever beat that.

Anyway, looking forward to 5. I'm sure it will be good. Hopefully they go back to Vice City in the next one. It would be cool to revisit that setting with it being updated the way the other settings have been/ are being done.




CBlake wrote:Lol you guys are dumb, I open the box and beat the shit out of the story mode, then I play free roam (Which you do alone) with my friends, I can see how I am ruining the game :roll:

It's not that you personally are ruining the single-player game.

It's the fact that there are players out there that prefer and want multi-player aspects, which forces developers to devote time that could otherwise be spent making the single-player experience even better. It's a waste of developer time and money that could be much better used.

Take GTA:IV for example. Many people have a problem with some aspects of the single player game. Now imagine that there was no multi-player and all the time and money spent developing that was instead put into the single-player game. I would imagine that it would be twice as good as it is now. More features, more story, possibly more DLC, etc. Instead that manpower was put into the multi-player experience.

I guess I don't get the drive for multi-player. Since when was gaming all about multi-player? If you want to do stuff with friends, go do stuff with friends. If you want to play a video game, then sit in your room and play a video game. Why do those two activities have to be combined?

Personally I value my alone time spent playing video games. I enjoy hanging out with my friends, but often times I want to escape from other people. That's what video games are great for. Anyway...enough about that.


Its actually money well spent and their sales are much higher because the online community for this game is high. It would make no since to devote no time to multiplayer because their sales would plummet. Honestly how many games today don't have some kind of multiplayer? The answer is not many, that is what people want and the game developers have to adapt to that. This isn't 2004 anymore.

Fucking kids today and your multiplayer gaming.

That's the thing. Gta never had multiplayer before and it was perfectly fine so why now. I don't think it's a coincidence that the instance they put this aspect in i stopped liking the series.
Image
User avatar
Private 1st Class xeno
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Colbert Nation

Re: Gta 5

Postby ManBungalow on Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:02 pm

Army of GOD wrote:Also, even though a lot of the GTAs have been "be a mercenary for other gangs", I loved SA's "be a motherfucking gang member". GROVE STREET 4 LYFE

I found the other gang members to be useless.
CJ was, and is, a one-man Grove Street.

Any homies you recruit die immediately or piss about for 30 minutes trying to get into your car which is parked in a narrow alleyway. And any of the missions in which Sweet was there to help you out, the main concern was looking after Sweet because he ran into shit and died without helping at all.

I'm having real trouble distinguishing from the past/present tense here.
Image
Colonel ManBungalow
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:02 am
Location: On a giant rock orbiting a star somewhere

Re: Gta 5

Postby tkr4lf on Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:58 pm

ManBungalow wrote:
Army of GOD wrote:Also, even though a lot of the GTAs have been "be a mercenary for other gangs", I loved SA's "be a motherfucking gang member". GROVE STREET 4 LYFE

I found the other gang members to be useless.
CJ was, and is, a one-man Grove Street.

Any homies you recruit die immediately or piss about for 30 minutes trying to get into your car which is parked in a narrow alleyway. And any of the missions in which Sweet was there to help you out, the main concern was looking after Sweet because he ran into shit and died without helping at all.

I'm having real trouble distinguishing from the past/present tense here.

Yeah, but it was hella tight riding around with 3 of your homies doing drive-by's on those punk ass ballas. Too bad most of the 4-door cars sucked.

I think there was one low rider car that you could get 3 of them in. I liked to take the low-riders down to that mod shop in the ghetto and pimp it out, with all the hardware and then paint everything green, like it was the gang car. Then I'd get my homies and do drive-by's in that beast. Good times.
User avatar
Major tkr4lf
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:35 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: Gta 5

Postby Army of GOD on Sun Feb 24, 2013 5:23 pm

1. Get bus
2. Recruit 8 guys
3. Bus gang

Also if it doesn't have San Fierro or Venturas that'll suck a little. I like the diversity of the other cities.
mrswdk is a ho
User avatar
Lieutenant Army of GOD
 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Gta 5

Postby Lootifer on Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:08 pm

I dont remember 4 being that bad but it has been a while since ive played it. Basically working my way through SA now; just up to the woozy casino missions in Venturas. Plan on moving onto 4 and its xpacs once im done.
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Lieutenant Lootifer
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing

Re: Gta 5

Postby Army of GOD on Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:42 pm

Lootifer wrote:I dont remember 4 being that bad but it has been a while since ive played it. Basically working my way through SA now; just up to the woozy casino missions in Venturas. Plan on moving onto 4 and its xpacs once im done.


which mission did you do last?
mrswdk is a ho
User avatar
Lieutenant Army of GOD
 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Gta 5

Postby Lootifer on Mon Feb 25, 2013 7:56 pm

The one where you jack the plane and parachute down to the dam. I havent read any spoilers or anything so no idea where I am at. Have tried to do all the optionals as well.
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Lieutenant Lootifer
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing

Re: Gta 5

Postby xeno on Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:01 pm

I had the guide book for sa I recommend picking one up at a thrift shop to go along with your gameplay
Image
User avatar
Private 1st Class xeno
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Colbert Nation

Re: Gta 5

Postby Lootifer on Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:03 pm

Nahhhh, more fun just shooting shit and im not much of a completionist.
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Lieutenant Lootifer
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing

Re: Gta 5

Postby Army of GOD on Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:17 am

That mission is impossible to do stealthily for me. It always starts out with me trying to sneak around but they always find me.
mrswdk is a ho
User avatar
Lieutenant Army of GOD
 
Posts: 7187
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: Gta 5

Postby tkr4lf on Tue Feb 26, 2013 10:37 am

Army of GOD wrote:That mission is impossible to do stealthily for me. It always starts out with me trying to sneak around but they always find me.

You gotta hide behind those massive generators in the dam. It's not too bad, especially if you have the silenced pistol. The knife can be kind of hard to use sometimes, as evidenced by that damn Madd Dog mission where you steal his rhymes for OG Loc.


And yes, I will be a bit disappointed too without San Fierro and Las Venturas. I feel like they could really make Las Venturas come alive this time. I mean, it was cool in SA, but I think they could better capture that Vegas feel with current generation technology. Honestly, I would be ok with just Los Santos and Las Venturas. I don't know, San Fierro never really stuck out at me. It was always my least favorite city/area, although that huge mountain was pretty fun to ride a dirt bike up and then find a place to ramp off.

Edit: From what I gather from the wiki article, it's set in Los Santos and its surrounding areas, so probably not San Fierro or Las Venturas. It does say, however, that the playable area is supposed to be bigger than Red Dead Redemption, GTA: IV and GTA: SA combined, which is pretty freaking huge. And apparently there are 3 main characters, that you can switch between at any time. Like they all have a different role in the mission, and you can take over whichever one you want to or switch between them throughout the mission. Sounds interesting.
User avatar
Major tkr4lf
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 11:35 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: Gta 5

Postby Lootifer on Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:10 pm

Army of GOD wrote:That mission is impossible to do stealthily for me. It always starts out with me trying to sneak around but they always find me.

Yeah you got to have a silenced pistol. And crouch the whole way.
I go to the gym to justify my mockery of fat people.
User avatar
Lieutenant Lootifer
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 pm
Location: Competing

Re: Gta 5

Postby nagerous on Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:29 pm

Image
User avatar
Captain nagerous
 
Posts: 7513
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:39 am

Previous

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users