I like GTA 4 better than RDR

does anyone feel the same way i do

This definately needed a topic of its own

Well I don't. I enjoyed GTA4 but I found RDR to be the better game.

RDR feels like there is far more things to do.. And the mini games (namely poker) is actually fun to do..Not to mention its part of a setting that hasn't been done to death..

RDR still has that new car smell. Come back in a couple of months to ask the same question. Fuhgeddabouditt

RDR is better in some ways. Graphics are naturally better, as is movement and gunplay. Side missions are a lot of fun (in particular, bounty hunting) and being able to hunt and sell for income is cool too.

What I dislike about the game in comparison to GTA is that it can get really boring traveling from one destination to another. Im a big hater of fast traveling, so riding by horse to a place while dealing with your horses' stamina and trying to stay on the path just gets boring after a while. GTA wins in environment diversity, which really helps make travelling to places less of a chore and more fun, as do the numerous radio stations. As for story, I won't comment as i havent finished it, but I do prefer John to Niko.

I like GTA4 better than RDR simply because I haven't played RDR yet, therefore I can't do a fair comparison.

I like GTA4 better than RDR simply because I haven't played RDR yet, therefore I can't do a fair comparison.

Shad0ki11

RDR >>> every single GTA game

Well many open world games are in cities nowadays (Spider-Man, InFamous, Prototype, GTA, Mafia 2, True Crime). Having a game like Red Dead Redemption with the amount of depth and freedom it has really makes it stand out more than any GTA game so far imo.

Also, Redemption is a more involving game and the liberty it gives when riding a horse really felt like I was playing a new Zelda game again... Untill someone shot me.:P

.. It's preference in the end.

RDR is better in some ways. Graphics are naturally better, as is movement and gunplay. Side missions are a lot of fun (in particular, bounty hunting) and being able to hunt and sell for income is cool too.

What I dislike about the game in comparison to GTA is that it can get really boring traveling from one destination to another. Im a big hater of fast traveling, so riding by horse to a place while dealing with your horses' stamina and trying to stay on the path just gets boring after a while. GTA wins in environment diversity, which really helps make travelling to places less of a chore and more fun, as do the numerous radio stations. As for story, I won't comment as i havent finished it, but I do prefer John to Niko.

Anjunaddict

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

Yeah, GTA IV seems to almost match Alan Wake, only problem is it has no foliage.

Yeah, GTA IV seems to almost match Alan Wake, only problem is it has no foliage.

spudofwar13

Tiny city parks versus this:

NO WAY!

Tiny city parks versus this:

NO WAY!

OK, you have got to be **** me!

How about some more:

Enough?

I like RDR better, but I didn't get the same reaction when playing GTA4 for the first time.

OK, you have got to be **** me!

How about some more:

Enough?

Why the **** are you talking about Alan Wake in a topic about GTA and RDR?

What does it lack? Intense storyline and gameplay? Awesome lighing effects and graphics? FOLIAGE?! :roll:

Why the **** are you talking about Alan Wake in a topic about GTA and RDR?

TheGrayEye

[QUOTE="TheGrayEye"]

Why the **** are you talking about Alan Wake in a topic about GTA and RDR?

antifanboyftw

Not as fun as Alan Wake and it's foliage though.

What does it lack? Intense storyline and gameplay? Awesome lighing effects and graphics? FOLIAGE?! :roll:

spudofwar13

I honestly don't know what you people are smoking?!?!

Alan Wake and its foliage is amazing! Period.

I honestly don't know what you people are smoking?!?!

Alan Wake and its foliage is amazing! Period.

"hey niko, would you like to go bowling?" when i'm getting chased by cops is very annoying.antifanboyftw

[spoiler] Which makes his death towards the end of the game somewhat of a relief. :P [/spoiler]

but then you couldn't get free cab rides with that angry foreigner :(antifanboyftw

Why ask for free cab rides when you can just steal a taxi or some other car? lol.

That foilage joke is already getting old and it was never funny but back on topic, RDR is jus GTA with horses.

That foilage joke is already getting old and it was never funny but back on topic, RDR is jus GTA with horses.

Fabolous206

Glad to people who haven't even played the game commenting on it.

[QUOTE="antifanboyftw"]but then you couldn't get free cab rides with that angry foreigner :(Shad0ki11

Why ask for free cab rides when you can just steal a taxi or some other car? lol.

Well I don't. I enjoyed GTA4 but I found RDR to be the better game.

jasonharris48

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

RDR is better in some ways. Graphics are naturally better, as is movement and gunplay. Side missions are a lot of fun (in particular, bounty hunting) and being able to hunt and sell for income is cool too.

What I dislike about the game in comparison to GTA is that it can get really boring traveling from one destination to another. Im a big hater of fast traveling, so riding by horse to a place while dealing with your horses' stamina and trying to stay on the path just gets boring after a while. GTA wins in environment diversity, which really helps make travelling to places less of a chore and more fun, as do the numerous radio stations. As for story, I won't comment as i havent finished it, but I do prefer John to Niko.

TheGrayEye

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

Well it can compare quite easily imo... there isn't a clear winner there i reckon.

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

RDR is better in some ways. Graphics are naturally better, as is movement and gunplay. Side missions are a lot of fun (in particular, bounty hunting) and being able to hunt and sell for income is cool too.

What I dislike about the game in comparison to GTA is that it can get really boring traveling from one destination to another. Im a big hater of fast traveling, so riding by horse to a place while dealing with your horses' stamina and trying to stay on the path just gets boring after a while. GTA wins in environment diversity, which really helps make travelling to places less of a chore and more fun, as do the numerous radio stations. As for story, I won't comment as i havent finished it, but I do prefer John to Niko.

TheGrayEye

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

And yeah it does. The majority of RDR is filled with cactus infested deserts. Honestly, Mexico hardly looks much different from America, just different plants to collect and such. It was refreshing reaching thieves landing, as it was green and wet compared to the usual orange and dry. I think you're trying to hard to make RDR something its not. All the towns are not different and diversified from eachother. A lot of them are tiny with like 4 or 5 buildings. To sum it up, you've basically got the white, desert towns, the wooden dock towns and then the walled mexican towns.

Yeah GTA is only urban, but it has a load of different districts that are easily distinguishable. You wouldn't mix up the airport with Times Square, would you? It was far more enjoyable for me to cruise through Liberty City blasting the radio than it is to ride horseback along a barren path in Red Dead.

[QUOTE="TheGrayEye"]

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

RDR is better in some ways. Graphics are naturally better, as is movement and gunplay. Side missions are a lot of fun (in particular, bounty hunting) and being able to hunt and sell for income is cool too.

What I dislike about the game in comparison to GTA is that it can get really boring traveling from one destination to another. Im a big hater of fast traveling, so riding by horse to a place while dealing with your horses' stamina and trying to stay on the path just gets boring after a while. GTA wins in environment diversity, which really helps make travelling to places less of a chore and more fun, as do the numerous radio stations. As for story, I won't comment as i havent finished it, but I do prefer John to Niko.

Anjunaddict

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

And yeah it does. The majority of RDR is filled with cactus infested deserts. Honestly, Mexico hardly looks much different from America, just different plants to collect and such. It was refreshing reaching thieves landing, as it was green and wet compared to the usual orange and dry. I think you're trying to hard to make RDR something its not. All the towns are not different and diversified from eachother. A lot of them are tiny with like 4 or 5 buildings. To sum it up, you've basically got the white, desert towns, the wooden dock towns and then the walled mexican towns.

Yeah GTA is only urban, but it has a load of different districts that are easily distinguishable. You wouldn't mix up the airport with Times Square, would you? It was far more enjoyable for me to cruise through Liberty City blasting the radio than it is to ride horseback along a barren path in Red Dead.

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

[QUOTE="TheGrayEye"]

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

mo0ksi

And yeah it does. The majority of RDR is filled with cactus infested deserts. Honestly, Mexico hardly looks much different from America, just different plants to collect and such. It was refreshing reaching thieves landing, as it was green and wet compared to the usual orange and dry. I think you're trying to hard to make RDR something its not. All the towns are not different and diversified from eachother. A lot of them are tiny with like 4 or 5 buildings. To sum it up, you've basically got the white, desert towns, the wooden dock towns and then the walled mexican towns.

Yeah GTA is only urban, but it has a load of different districts that are easily distinguishable. You wouldn't mix up the airport with Times Square, would you? It was far more enjoyable for me to cruise through Liberty City blasting the radio than it is to ride horseback along a barren path in Red Dead.

[QUOTE="TheGrayEye"]

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

RDR is better in some ways. Graphics are naturally better, as is movement and gunplay. Side missions are a lot of fun (in particular, bounty hunting) and being able to hunt and sell for income is cool too.

What I dislike about the game in comparison to GTA is that it can get really boring traveling from one destination to another. Im a big hater of fast traveling, so riding by horse to a place while dealing with your horses' stamina and trying to stay on the path just gets boring after a while. GTA wins in environment diversity, which really helps make travelling to places less of a chore and more fun, as do the numerous radio stations. As for story, I won't comment as i havent finished it, but I do prefer John to Niko.

Anjunaddict

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

And yeah it does. The majority of RDR is filled with cactus infested deserts. Honestly, Mexico hardly looks much different from America, just different plants to collect and such. It was refreshing reaching thieves landing, as it was green and wet compared to the usual orange and dry. I think you're trying to hard to make RDR something its not. All the towns are not different and diversified from eachother. A lot of them are tiny with like 4 or 5 buildings. To sum it up, you've basically got the white, desert towns, the wooden dock towns and then the walled mexican towns.

Yeah GTA is only urban, but it has a load of different districts that are easily distinguishable. You wouldn't mix up the airport with Times Square, would you? It was far more enjoyable for me to cruise through Liberty City blasting the radio than it is to ride horseback along a barren path in Red Dead.

No, just no. The variety in the world of RDR's world isn't even questionable. GTA has a lot of districts, but it's just all one city, it's just all buildings. RDR has buildings and towns, towns like Blackwater, which are as close to modern as you can get in the game, with paved roads and cars. Then you have Armidillo, which is the classic western town, and something like Escalera from Mexico, which has a completely different style than Armidillo, despite also being surrounded by desert.

Also, the nature of the desert in both Mexico and New Austin is completely different, to say they're not that different is to forget what the other one looks like. Also, I'm definately not making RDR into something it isn't, I'm just telling it like it is. Rockstar poured years of effort into this world, and it shows. The districts in GTA's NYC are different, but not nearly as different as having snowy mountains, large forests, great plains, and huge mexican deserts, together all on the same map...

EDIT: Regarding the fast travel, if you don't want to use it that's fine, just don't make it a con that the travel is too slow in the game, despite the fact that they put fast travel for a reason.

Its boring, just like GTA was.. Its fantastic in all areas, graphics, voice acting, the characters are likeable, the world is really interesting and looks awesome.. But the gameplay is mediocre just like GTA4s was, and thats why i just cant get into it. It seems rockstar thinks about everything else other than the gameplay first and slaps that on as an after though after they are done creating the open world, and writing the story etc.

Its boring, just like GTA was.. Its fantastic in all areas, graphics, voice acting, the characters are likeable, the world is really interesting and looks awesome.. But the gameplay is mediocre just like GTA4s was, and thats why i just cant get into it. It seems rockstar thinks about everything else other than the gameplay first and slaps that on as an after though after they are done creating the open world, and writing the story etc.

VendettaRed07

What? The gunplay in this game is just as good as any other 3rd person shooter out these days- actually the dead eye and euphoria system, might arguably make it better in some respects.

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"]

[QUOTE="TheGrayEye"]

If you're a big hater of fast traveling, than that is your own fault, because the traveling is perfect in this game.

GTA wins in environment diversity? Are we both talking about the same gta here (gta4)? It's not even an opinon, it's a fact, RDR has more environmental diversity than gta 4. Cactus filled deserts, grassy plains and giant fields, green forests, snowy mountains, lakes and rivers, mexican deserts and canyons, and not to mention crap loads of towns, all different and diversified from each other with tons of buildings to go inside.

What does gta 4 have? It's all buildings, and though there are diversity with those buildings (realistically), it's still all just urban, it can't even compare to RDR.

TheGrayEye

And yeah it does. The majority of RDR is filled with cactus infested deserts. Honestly, Mexico hardly looks much different from America, just different plants to collect and such. It was refreshing reaching thieves landing, as it was green and wet compared to the usual orange and dry. I think you're trying to hard to make RDR something its not. All the towns are not different and diversified from eachother. A lot of them are tiny with like 4 or 5 buildings. To sum it up, you've basically got the white, desert towns, the wooden dock towns and then the walled mexican towns.

Yeah GTA is only urban, but it has a load of different districts that are easily distinguishable. You wouldn't mix up the airport with Times Square, would you? It was far more enjoyable for me to cruise through Liberty City blasting the radio than it is to ride horseback along a barren path in Red Dead.

No, just no. The variety in the world of RDR's world isn't even questionable. GTA has a lot of districts, but it's just all one city, it's just all buildings. RDR has buildings and towns, towns like Blackwater, which are as close to modern as you can get in the game, with paved roads and cars. Then you have Armidillo, which is the classic western town, and something like Escalera from Mexico, which has a completely different style than Armidillo, despite also being surrounded by desert.

Also, the nature of the desert in both Mexico and New Austin is completely different, to say they're not that different is to forget what the other one looks like. Also, I'm definately not making RDR into something it isn't, I'm just telling it like it is. Rockstar poured years of effort into this world, and it shows. The districts in GTA's NYC are different, but not nearly as different as having snowy mountains, large forests, great plains, and huge mexican deserts, together all on the same map...

EDIT: Regarding the fast travel, if you don't want to use it that's fine, just don't make it a con that the travel is too slow in the game, despite the fact that they put fast travel for a reason.

Im gonna wait until I finish RDR before I talk anymore. What I will say though is that from what I have played, theres been no snowy mountains (backdrops don't count). 99% has taken place across the desert or in towns ... surrounded by the desert.

As for GTA, I still believe there is a lot more diversity. Instead of having large open deserts, you have sprawling streets. You still have rivers and bridges and roads and parks with loads of memorable landmarks. Theres also a lot more diversity in means of travel (cars, buses, bikes, boats etc).

And for the fast travel, you're missing my point. Im not saying the travel is too slow. What im saying is that there isn't enough in there to make travelling more enjoyable and less like a chore. I never used the fast travel in GTA either, yet it never felt like a chore. Im not sure if it was the map layout, or the surroundings, or the radio stations but it just didn't.

I never liked GTA but I might be getting RDR on Sunday so obviously I like the way it looks. GTA never did it for me, all that gangster stuff and trying to be as bad as possible was never really my style, I like being the bad guy every once and a while but GTA had annoying dialoge in my opinion so I couldn't stand listening to the game.