This topic is locked from further discussion.
GTA 4 has a better story hands down but in San Andreas just messing around is ten times more fun. To me San Andreas is better just because there is alot more to do. What do you all think?wiidog
If I'm going to be honest, GTA3 wowed me the most. Vice City made me feel the most at home, gave me the best music and gave me the best comedy. San Andreas stood the test of time and I played it over and over and over It just had so much to do and it could straddle the line between a realistic and surreal game (it was crazy, but then, it was believable enough not to make it a fantasy game). GTA4 is fun, but it hasn't wowed me to the extent that the rest did. Personally, I don't think more realism was the right route to go through, I mean, getting away from the police is too easy now, and the lack of army, and a lot of other stuff just makes it feel too gritty, not enough madness.
This is probably a politically incorrect statement, but who cares...I feel most people did not like GTA: SA as much because they could not relate to the protagonist. South Central LA like setting with a brother running around the neighborhood doing dirt. It was a drastic change from the mafia-like setting of previous games in the series...
In all honesty I thought GTA:SA was far fetched going from simply hoodlife to a multi-millionare, parachute jumpin, jet-pack flyin, cessna crashing atmoshere....but I still enjoyed the game and I have it till this day.
To each his own I guess...
Game On...
If ever a game was to big it was San Andreas , getting from A to B could take bloody ages. But I do agree it was the more interesting game, I love the city in GTA IV, but there really isn't that much to do in it. I hope DL corrects the problems with replay value.
This is probably a politically incorrect statement, but who cares...I feel most people did not like GTA: SA as much because they could not relate to the protagonist. South Central LA like setting with a brother running around the neighborhood doing dirt. It was a drastic change from the mafia-like setting of previous games in the series...
In all honesty I thought GTA:SA was far fetched going from simply hoodlife to a multi-millionare, parachute jumpin, jet-pack flyin, cessna crashing atmoshere....but I still enjoyed the game and I have it till this day.
To each his own I guess...
Game On...
FatalDomain
Actually, I disliked it because there was too much to do - you need to excercise, eat food, etc etc etc. It took away from the wanton crime spree that has always made GTA for me. Heck, I think the current friend mechanic in GTAIV is more obtrusive than I'd like.
GTA3 and Vice City were my favorites. VC moreso, mainly because of the adition of motorcycles, which have given me oh so much joy.
SA is the only GTA game i quit playing after about 2 days. The settings was horrible, the gang thing was a turn off and the characters were annoying as hell. Yeah sure it must have had more things to do than other GTA's..but too much to do=/= more fun..jsut more tedious imo and GTA needs to have that gripping story and a great cast of characters...it didnt' have it for me. GTAIV and Vice are the best. I'm not being racist against black people..i like black people(especially SLJ)..but damn..the whole gang thing was a big turn off for me.
Maybe i'm brittish and didn't get that...i dont' know. I can just relate to GTAIV much better.
If ever a game was to big it was San Andreas , getting from A to B could take bloody ages. But I do agree it was the more interesting game, I love the city in GTA IV, but there really isn't that much to do in it. I hope DL corrects the problems with replay value.
Nick_D7
But getting from A to B was still bloody fun.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment