• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

GTA San Andreas is kinda trash

Paltheos

Member
Count me in the 'Don't like' camp. San Andreas was a step in the wrong direction (that Rockstar only continued plowing down in GTA 4). There were so many more systems added to the game, i.e. dieting, visiting a barber, visiting a bar, riding bicycles, &c that felt superfluous to me. None of them were bad and I could (and often did) ignore them but the bigger problem imo was the the design philosophy. It seemed Rockstar were more concerned with offering new experiences to the player and making things bigger - I particularly draw attention to the huge, empty farm land you're dropped in the midgame that's just a tedious bore to trek through - than with making that shit fun.

Building a drug empire and buying up properties in the coke filled '80s of Vice City is fun. The minute gameplay differences/additions between GTA3 and Vice City were fun (although I couldn't tell you the specifics off the top of my head). I don't know where Rockstar should have gone after Vice City, but I can tell you what worked. Yakuza games work, because they go all-in on the core elements of their games - Serious stories, flashy and spectacular combat, and often over-the-top and/or uncynical sidequests. Crackdown (1) works because it leans in on camp and adds fun side objectives (i.e. collecting jumping orbs in jumping challenges so you can jump higher, etc.). San Andreas is boring: More of the same plus extra content that doesn't build on or add to what made the older games fun.
 
At the end of the day, all these games have to be remembered what they represented at the time of release. It was a massive hit. I honestly cant play any older GTA games anymore, the controls are terrible but wont deny their relevance during their time. Same as someone asks "Whats so special about Half-Life?"....if you weren't there day one, to you its just another shooter.
 

EDMIX

Member
M4HPLKd.png
 

Hip Hop

Member
Nah its a classic.

want to know why?
I beat the whole mobile version, beat the end of the campaign using only touch controls, my iPhone SE 1st gen tiny screen. and no cheat codes.

No other game would make someone play so stupidly and cumbersome, but damn it I had fun and I never want to do that again though. Still a classic
 

bender

What time is it?
The map is the best in the series. I spent my first night trying to get an 18-wheeler up those dirt roads of Mount Chiliad so that I could ramp off the top, bail out and then parachute to safety. I love Vice City as much as the next person but the map is probably the weakest of the original 3D trilogy. San Andreas is also the last time that the series had great music and talk radio stations.

And speaking of memory lane and great sound tracks, my first night in Vice City was spent trying to best my stoppie records on the Faggio on the main strip while absorbing those tunes.
 
Last edited:

GenericUser

Member
"the wonder is, not that the field of opinions is so vast, but that some man have really really shitty ones"
Anatole France, Bethesda Employee
 
Likely already mentioned but context needs to be heavily considered.

San Andreas, at least for me and my group at the time, was unbelievable - the largest game ever made? The biggest map ever that you can just drive through. See back in those days (for me) just having a massive sandbox to walk around in was fun and novel at the time. There weren’t many games like it. There’s a reason why the Halo 2 Easter eggs (where you can jump high and out of the map) were so fun - there was a thought that there was a whole side of the game world yet to be explored.

Today, every other game released is a massive open world game. So there’s more scrutiny if the the world is just barren/empty. A large sandbox of San Andreas is simply not unique today, it’s the norm.

Could also be a part of growing up. Instead of the vast endless game world we imagined as kids/teens, we learned games really are just a bunch of code with set parameters that control the “vastness” of the game world.
 
Last edited:

bad guy

as bad as Danny Zuko in gym knickers
I loved just roaming around the map listening to music. SA clearly had the best off-road experience of all GTAs. GTA5 is so dumbed down; You can drive up a 45° slope with a Ferrari.

Multi Theft Auto was THE SHIT!!
 

PeteBull

Member
Hm, so we arent crazy. These leaps really are less substantial...and 4k 60 fps goals make it worse.

I blame the wii to be honest. Ever since nintendo gimped on tech advancements, everyone slowed down too
Nintendo is doing their own thing, but a lot of us, good games and nintendo fans, would give a lot for proper stationary console that could play switch games in solid 4k 60 instead of usually 720p 30 with dips like on switch now, sometimes even below 720p.

The reason sony/ms new consoles/games arent as impressive graphically is simple- tech advancement slowed down big time, if say u had jump from ps3 to ps5 in 1 gen, then every1 would be vowed for sure, and we even got example of exactly same game both running on ps3 then on ps5, demons souls watch it in 4k for best effect coz of youtube compression algoryth, even if u dont have 4k screen, u will still see more details/shaper image .

2nd game, which got exactly similar treatment is last of us part1 here big caviot- compare ps5 to og ps3 version. then actual jump is huge, just like we remember it back from earlier console gens, since ps3 to ps4 to ps5 is relatively small jump in hardware ofc games actually look 1 gen apart only when u compare ps3 to ps5, from pov of old console generation jump, which ended with ps2 jump.

Those 2 examples are good coz we getting not only improved res/visuals but stable 60fps from ps3's unstable 30fps with dips sometimes around/under 20, so actuall gameplay fun is significantly improved while u play them too, best of both worlds.
 
Top Bottom