Arguments about how good this game is seems to be a notorious routine, and I know exactly why.
Storyline:
In all previous installments of the series, the storyline has been the weakness. They have NEVER been strong, and rely on the intense pleasure you get from the experience to make money and keep gamers extraordinarily interested. It worked so well. So when this game came out, people were expecting the same thing. What we got was something totally unexpected - a quality storyline. The story of Niko Bellic's "journey" to America, and his attempt at success is just unbelievably emotionally-gripping. Rockstar keeps you in the story and it never lets up. It's a crazy ride with laughs, cries, and everything in between. And that's where it went wrong. As a big fan of the "Grand Theft Auto" series, I was one of those people expecting stupid, crazy, silly, over-the-top, slapstick comedic fun. We were greeted instead with a serious, mind-numbing action/adventure game. For the first time, the storyline takes away from the game's fun. That's exactly where the controversy lies. The game is undeniably the best game in the series, but it also is the most limited in terms of freedom and just stupid fun. There's no planes, not a HUGE map, and it can get pretty boring after you complete the campaign. The campaign takes up a lot of time though, and I think that was also a problem, because it just makes the empty feeling of freedom more noticeable afterwards. For all these reasons, however, gamers need to understand that it is, without a doubt, the best installment to date. It may not be the most FUN, and that's certainly where people found the problems. Bottom line, if you want a gripping storyline about a guy from Europe coming to America and trying to survive the hardships and struggles of American life with extreme emotion expressed throughout each level, then get this game. If you're looking for an updated graphics version of "San Andreas", it's time to move on and look for something else to play. I think Rockstar worked hard in making this game one that should be appealing to TRUE gamers.
Graphics:
For the time, the graphics in "Grand Theft Auto IV" were phenomenal. Everything was extremely detailed, and had a perfect finish. The vehicles looked absolutely realistic, as did the vast variety of character models. Rockstar outdid themselves with graphics in this game, which was certainly a big step from games like "San Andreas", where graphics were pretty poor. There really isn't too much to say about the graphics in this game, because the bottom line is that they are quite good, and will keep you quite inspired as you progress through the game. I do also want to commend Rockstar for managing to create a solid looking game without forcing gamers to have to deal with serious frame-rate issues. Thanks!
Entertainment:
Fun? Yes. As fun as "San Andreas" or "Vice City"? No. Not even close. But there's much more to a game than just entertainment. This game is phenomenal, but it takes a serious mind to play, not a 12 year old immature kid who just wants to blow stuff up. This game will go down as a classic, though for these reasons I have explained throughout this review, it will never lose its controversial debates.
Recommendations:
-fans of the series NOT just interested in the "fun" aspect
Overall: A-