Oct 17 2006, 2:01 pm
In response to Danial.Beta
|
|
Falacy
 |
iiiii played gta 3, i thought it sucked! especialy compared to SA
|
Falacy wrote:
iiiii played gta 3, i thought it sucked! especialy compared to SA but nobody liiiiikes you | |
Falacy wrote:
iiiii played gta 3, i thought it sucked! especialy compared to SA Did you play it when it first came out, or after SA? Because that could make a world of difference in your perception of it. At the time GTA3 came out, it was revolutionary. All 3D games hitherto had locked the player into small levels or arenas (except for Driver and Driver II) and GTA 3 offered levels of freedom, variety, and detail that just hadn't been seen in video games before. It's good to seek out the best games available, but it's also valuable to be able to see the games of the past in their historic context. Look at Atari 2600 Pitfall, for example -- by modern standards it's laughable, but for its time it was an amazingly well-tuned and good-looking game. And if you're not too spoiled you can still have fun playing it today! | |
i played it after SA came out but before i played SA, i just thought the story was no good, the gameplay was boring, the graphics werent that impressive, there were only like 2 choices of cars lol, and! you couldnt even swim, preeeeeeety lame!
| |
2 cars? What game were you playing? Every GTA I have played has had at least 20 or so cars(I think GTA 1 had at least that many, but it might have had less). I know that GTA:SA had more cars than GTA3, but think of the time period. GTA3 was released in 2001, as to where GTA:SA was released in 2004. That is 3 years of time(Probably more, knowing how long games take to develop) to enhance the game. GTA:SA and GTA:VC are both actually part of GTA3. They run on the same engine and are considered to be GTA3, just GTA3:SA and GTA3:VC. So it is rather hard to pick on GTA3 when the next two where almost identical, just adding more content.
The story lines in all GTA games are a little weak, but that is because of the open ended gameplay style. You sacrifices strong story lines for an open world to travel. SA didn't have much of a story line either. | |
lol i liked the story line in SA, though it was rather unbeleiveable, crazy gang members trying to clean up the community, could have done without all the cussing though, they should add a censor option lol. and SA has way more features then GTA3, at least from what i saw, you cant swim, you cant change your body appearance, you cant change your clothes, theres several vehicle types in SA besides just regular cars: motor cycles, boats, planes, etc, i didnt see any of these in 3, so though they are built on the same engine that doesnt mean theyre the same game, look at xmen legends and champions of norrath, those games are built on the same engine but are nothing alike
| |
Time for me to weigh in here. As others have said, programming and graphics both take a backseat to gameplay. Without good gameplay, the game will be crap no matter what else it has. It may be pretty, even noteworthy crap, but it will still be crap.
Unfortunately too many game authors now have grown up with the paradigm of games that have an in-depth story, rather than the abstract qualities of the old arcades. Some of those had stories just thrown in at the last minute, something silly to make the premise sound plausible. But most of those game authors aren't good writers, so the effort they pour into a story is wasted. What a game author really needs more than anything else is a good grasp of game mechanics. They should understand on some level how board games work, some of the stuff involved, so they can translate that to other games. Everquest exists because Rogue existed, because D&D existed, because board games existed. At some point you just need the fundamentals down. Lummox JR | |
Falacy wrote:
lol i liked the story line in SA, though it was rather unbeleiveable, crazy gang members trying to clean up the community, could have done without all the cussing though, they should add a censor option lol. It's a Mature-rated game. If the swearing offends your sensibilities, then you should maybe heed that label a little more closely. ;-) As for "unbelievable", I take it you know absolutely nothing about the gang culture. Neighbourhood gangs do in fact do that, although obviously the game did take a few creative liberties as far as motivation and means are concerned. There's a big difference between neighbourhood gangs and criminal gangs, of course. Neighbourhood gangs commit crimes against other neighbourhoods as a sort of "ours is the best 'hood and we're going to make sure of it". Criminal gangs, on the other hand, commit crimes simply because they're anti-social. and SA has way more features then GTA3, at least from what i saw: you cant swim, Added in GTA:SA. you cant change your body appearance, Added in GTA:VC. you cant change your clothes, Added in GTA:SA. theres several vehicle types in SA besides just regular cars: motor cycles, boats, planes, etc, All existed from GTA3 (though GTA3's plane, the Dodo, was stubby-winged except for a single story mission and thus almost impossible to fly), with the exception of motorcycles which were added in GTA:VC, and player-controllable trains which were added in GTA:SA. Even in the case of motorcycles, they weren't included in GTA3 simply due to time constraints. You also forgot to mention: * Eating, which was added in GTA:SA, * Acquisition of assets, which was added in GTA:VC, * Girlfriends, which were added in GTA:SA. i didnt see any of these in 3, so though they are built on the same engine that doesnt mean theyre the same game, look at xmen legends and champions of norrath, those games are built on the same engine but are nothing alike You have a nasty habit of making non-sequiturs, although I will agree that they aren't the same game. They're stand-alone upgrades of the same game. You give me four years and a team of developers, artists, and programmers and I guarantee that I can do just about anything to upgrade one of my old games to have more features than GTA3. GTA3 was revolutionary. You simply aren't qualified to say otherwise because you weren't old enough/weren't timely enough to play it when it was released. There's a reason every car-driving game since GTA3 has been compared to GTA3, and then to each successive game in the GTA3 series. ;-) | |
lol i dont think ive ever heard of a car driving game being compared to a GTA game... and! all those things that you pointed out were added in SA, thats what i meant, that they werent in 3 but were in SA
| |
All existed from GTA3 (though GTA3's plane, the Dodo, was stubby-winged except for a single story mission and thus almost impossible to fly), with the exception of motorcycles which were added in GTA:VC, and player-controllable trains which were added in GTA:SA. Even in the case of motorcycles, they weren't included in GTA3 simply due to time constraints. You could control the train in the original gta:P | |
Jtgibson said:
"> you cant change your body appearance, Added in GTA:VC. you cant change your clothes, Added in GTA:SA." Actually you can change your body (clothes and face, etc.) in GTA 3 on the PC version, and you can change your clothes in-game in GTA:VC. | |
Elation wrote:
Jtgibson said: Yeah, the definitions I was using were a bit off. As far as "change your body appearance", I was using the definition "change into a different outfit entirely", when I realise Falacy was talkiing about changing body weight, muscle structure, etc., which was definitely added only in GTA:SA. "Changing clothes" I was defining to be "change into individual shirts, pants, etc. individually", to be distinct form the "change your body appearance" definition I was using. I did know about the uniform-switching in GTA:VC. (Hell, I finished the main story three days after I got it. ;-)) Retexturing your body doesn't quite count, as far as the first one is concerned -- we're talking game features that you can access directly through the game itself. However, I haven't played GTA3 on the PC, so who knows! | |
Jerico2day wrote:
You could control the train in the original gta:P You could also control motorcycles. What are you getting at? =P | |
If you haven't heard of a driving game being compared to Grand Theft Auto 3, Vice City, and San Andreas respectively, then you really haven't been reading any reviews about driving games. ;-)
True Crime: Streets of L.A. was directly compared to GTA3 and most people rated it very, very poorly. Sadly, the game itself was just fine -- no comparison to GTA3, but certainly not a reason not to buy it, especially when taking into account the melee fighting system, which was superb. GTA3 and its successors threw off the curve for everyone. =) | |
Warcarft III uses lower quality models compared to most video games these days. It's gameplay and ability to make so many different kinds of games makes it so cool and fun to play. Too bad it's been stormed by dota, but BYOND has been stormed by DBZ.
Anyways, it's the programming behind Warcraft III that makes it so good and graphics made it more easily playable. I did hear about a crazy bug in the engine that made your computer slow to a crawl but it's never happened to me so I can't say much about it. But that's what happens when you program. Programming takes a lot of time and so does making a model and it's textures, etc. Most time and work required goes to programming but not by a longshot. I would say game design is the most important because without it there wouldn't be a game. Then second place goes to programming because without it there wouldn't be a videogame(the subject here) with things that the player wouldn't have to do specifically, the computer handles it. Third goes to graphics because it's good to be able to see things. It adds color but it doesn't make the game. And last goes to effects, as in graphic effects not the programming of those effects. Effects require a better computer and take time to program for little gain. Unfortunately people have lost this perspective and want more and more pretty graphics and effects. | |
Jtgibson wrote:
Retexturing your body doesn't quite count, as far as the first one is concerned -- we're talking game features that you can access directly through the game itself. However, I haven't played GTA3 on the PC, so who knows! I know. =P There's a bmp file you can mess about with. Making an entirely pink player character is pretty fun. | |
Jtgibson wrote:
True Crime: Streets of L.A. was directly compared to GTA3 and most people rated it very, very poorly. Sadly, the game itself was just fine Nearly fine. =P The fact that so much as touching an innocent person would label you as a bad guy... how am I supposed to be a renegade bad-cop when running over old people loses me points? =( | |