no random car missions if you find a car in the middle of nowhere, no stores to enter and rob (outside of missions), no hood takeovers or defends, and I could probably think of more things previous GTA games had that are missing.
It seems like poor form to post potential spoilers in a thread where someone is asking whether they should buy the game, but there's no way to address that question without including plenty, so fair warning.
***SPOILERS***
I actually liked GTA IV; I don't know why so many people like to hate on it after the fact. So I'm not going to bother trying to refute a point where you and I agree. But I strongly disagree with you about the plot build for GTA V. You have three distinct people with three distinct motivations; the young guy who wants to get out of poverty, the older guy who is struggling to make a straight life work but who can't outrun his past, and the psychopath whose pent-up frustration about his lack of career progress since the last big job he pulled has essentially driven him crazy. Their interactions all build around the fact that they have three different reasons for being involved with the story which culminates in a number of interactions where Trevor almost gets Michael killed, not to mention the choice at the end of who to kill (although, let's face it, you're always choosing the third way). I liked GTA IV and Niko, but I don't know how anyone could say with a straight face that Niko's story is somehow better than the protagonists of GTA V; they're both pretty cookie-cutter. And Claude? Anyone who thinks that a protagonist that never speaks somehow has more of a story arc than the characters in GTA V is either insane or watching The Miracle Worker.
As far as missions, though, GTA V absolutely blows GTA IV away. You have missions where you shoot down a plane and chase it across the country on a dirtbike, where you catch up to a plane in midair and crash a cropduster into it just so you can hijack it before getting shot down and parachuting to safety, where you break into and burn down a rival meth lab, where you rappel down the side of a building attached to a helicopter to snatch an informant, where you catch up to your stolen boat on the freeway so Franklin can jump on to it to get it back, or where you ride across the top of a train on a dirtbike to hijack it. People raved about the bank job in GTA IV that was ripped straight from Heat; now you get multiple heists reminiscent of Heat, including the scene where you literally knock over an armored car with a truck. You get a variety of assassination missions. You get large-scale shootouts. You get workable stealth sections. It's very, very well structured, even without the filler (and at least the filler this time doesn't involve an incessantly whiny cousin calling you every 12 seconds to hang out).
I liked GTA IV; GTA V is better in every conceivable way (except, ironically, the Online portion, which I thought was passable in IV and hate in V).
<snip>
I might buy it when it's $5, but I already bought it for the 360 when it came out.
I agree with most naysayers about 5; the world is a big set piece with little interaction. Nothing to enter, no random car missions if you find a car in the middle of nowhere, no stores to enter and rob (outside of missions), no hood takeovers or defends, and I could probably think of more things previous GTA games had that are missing.
So what do they give us? Yoga (yawn), tennis (yawn), golf(yawn), etc (yawn). GTA isn't really a sandbox game anymore, but a series of missions you have to travel to.
I played the hell out of 4's multiplayer, but got tired of 5's after about ten hours, which shouldn't make sense since 5 has much more options. It just feels boring grinding out cash, and the real money shop for in-game cash really put me off. I'll never buy another Rockstar game for full price.
Anyone who says "bargain bin" for GTA 5 is out of their mind. Seriously, it's worth the asking price.
Such as? 5 towing missions? Hunting down 50 scraps of paper? Yoga? And first person mode? HA!. Its worth $30 if that. Better yet, just replay III and the first San Andreas. Before Rockstar sold out and started focussing on multi-trash.
Would you be so kind to give us a list of all the games you like and play, that have a "non-empty world" by your standards ? Larger, more freedom, more variety, more detail, better graphics, better artwork, more quests, etc.- The world is empty, of course you can't enter any buildings or interact with anything unless Rockstar built it in.
Regarding the lack of buildings you can go inside, it seems to be a theme among open world games, except for the Elder Scrolls/Fallout games which have loading screens between the interiors and the overworld.
I wonder if is there some kind of technical limitation that makes doing building interiors a challenge in a seamless open world. Or if it is really just a lack of time/desire type thing. Saint's Row and Just Cause and Sleeping Dogs and Assassin's Creed and all the others are all the same, 99% of buildings are a facade.
I think that's going to be the next big breakthrough in these games.
I enjoyed 5 (paid $42 for the 360 version) and hated 4. I forced myself to finish 4, it was just tedious and boring.
I won't re-purchase 5 till it hits around $30 or less.
I found 4 boring as hell. Had no interest in things like the dating missions. 5 is holding me...for now. But it does feel disjointed with multiple people to control.
Then again, Vice City is the best game. I could do without going back to San Andreas and I could REALLY do without the gang/hood BS. It's why I couldn't stomach GTA:SA.
AgreedAnyone who says "bargain bin" for GTA 5 is out of their mind. Seriously, it's worth the asking price.
Regarding the lack of buildings you can go inside, it seems to be a theme among open world games, except for the Elder Scrolls/Fallout games which have loading screens between the interiors and the overworld.
I wonder if is there some kind of technical limitation that makes doing building interiors a challenge in a seamless open world. Or if it is really just a lack of time/desire type thing. Saint's Row and Just Cause and Sleeping Dogs and Assassin's Creed and all the others are all the same, 99% of buildings are a facade.
I think that's going to be the next big breakthrough in these games.
Regarding the lack of buildings you can go inside, it seems to be a theme among open world games, except for the Elder Scrolls/Fallout games which have loading screens between the interiors and the overworld.
I wonder if is there some kind of technical limitation that makes doing building interiors a challenge in a seamless open world. Or if it is really just a lack of time/desire type thing. Saint's Row and Just Cause and Sleeping Dogs and Assassin's Creed and all the others are all the same, 99% of buildings are a facade.
I think that's going to be the next big breakthrough in these games.
There a lot of buildings in GTA5 that should be enterable. There's a casino, why can't I go in and gamble? There should be about 10x as many convenience stores as well. And banks and things of this nature. They dont need to make every building enterable but there should be more types of enterable buildings. Why isnt there police departments and fire departments I can walk around in?
Would you be so kind to give us a list of all the games you like and play, that have a "non-empty world" by your standards ? Larger, more freedom, more variety, more detail, better graphics, better artwork, more quests, etc.
Because if you think GTA V is empty, then I suspect there will be no games in the world that make your standards.
Just 30 years ago, we had Donkey Kong. Your character could run up slopes and jump over barrels. Look at GTA V now. Huge !!! Just huge. In all respects. If you can't appreciate that, and the game doesn't meet your standards, then I am afraid you will have a very frustrating and angry life ahead of you. Good luck with it.