The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas'.
I know, another GTA Topic but I can assure you that you wont be angry after you see this : [URL]http://ps2.ign.com/articles/527/527358p1.html[/URL]
Read all 5 pages of it.
Great isn't it, but I haven't got a PS2 so I cant get it until it comes out on the Xbox.
But still, Im still looking forward to seeing what features it has etc.
Enjoy!
Read all 5 pages of it.
Great isn't it, but I haven't got a PS2 so I cant get it until it comes out on the Xbox.
But still, Im still looking forward to seeing what features it has etc.
Enjoy!
Page:
....so quality not quantity...it shud be how Liberty City was
Make the game properly fun to play in a city and that'd be better than something which I seriously doubt the PS2 will be able to deal with.
As FFF said, VC was a slow-ish game with shocking draw distances - and pretty bland too. So an ENTIRE 3 cities?
As FFF said, VC was a slow-ish game with shocking draw distances - and pretty bland too. So an ENTIRE 3 cities?
That's my only main worry about San Andreas, I just think it's going to be too big. I'm with FFF on this one, I thought Liberty City was a great size as it was easy enough to get around, but you still got that impression of being in a massive, living city. Just imagine GTA3 with all these new features, that would be much better.
Nothing particularly new or interesting in there.
God knows why, but I'm being painfully cynical over this one.
It just seems to me they're trying to add as many new features in as possible, and not reworking or improving the features that were crappy before-hand.
I'm just not keen on the bigger landscape - considering how badly the PS2 coped with VC's scale (loading gaps, repeated textures, god-awful slow-down).
And mountains and desert just don't fit with a game like GTA - you're supposed to be in a city, doing city things amonst people. Not swanning about around empty mountains, shooting a rambler every half hour.
And I don't want to drive for an hour through these non-locations to a misson, fail it, the have to take the journey again.
I'd rather see a smaller, more detailed, more perfect city - with really individual locations, a decent frame rate, and be able to stand on a building and there actually be some stuff to shoot in the road.
Kudos on reworking the fighting / aiming system though - it needed it.
Still really not happy about these 'realistic' touched - getting tired while running really p!ssed me off in the other games, this'll probably kill me. I think it makes the game less fun, adds another chore into the mix.
God knows why, but I'm being painfully cynical over this one.
It just seems to me they're trying to add as many new features in as possible, and not reworking or improving the features that were crappy before-hand.
I'm just not keen on the bigger landscape - considering how badly the PS2 coped with VC's scale (loading gaps, repeated textures, god-awful slow-down).
And mountains and desert just don't fit with a game like GTA - you're supposed to be in a city, doing city things amonst people. Not swanning about around empty mountains, shooting a rambler every half hour.
And I don't want to drive for an hour through these non-locations to a misson, fail it, the have to take the journey again.
I'd rather see a smaller, more detailed, more perfect city - with really individual locations, a decent frame rate, and be able to stand on a building and there actually be some stuff to shoot in the road.
Kudos on reworking the fighting / aiming system though - it needed it.
Still really not happy about these 'realistic' touched - getting tired while running really p!ssed me off in the other games, this'll probably kill me. I think it makes the game less fun, adds another chore into the mix.
Lou Role wrote:
> And I'm not slagging off Rockstar either, I have the utmost respect
> for them. But I'm willing to point out a few faults in their games
> as well, as I have an open mind.
Ok, fair doos :)
>A countryside could be decent if you can go Mountain biking or trail biking
Seeing as there are bikes in the pics (maybe different types of bikes) then this could be a possibility, knowing Rockstar, another mini side game :)
> And I'm not slagging off Rockstar either, I have the utmost respect
> for them. But I'm willing to point out a few faults in their games
> as well, as I have an open mind.
Ok, fair doos :)
>A countryside could be decent if you can go Mountain biking or trail biking
Seeing as there are bikes in the pics (maybe different types of bikes) then this could be a possibility, knowing Rockstar, another mini side game :)
Jive wrote:
> I think we should wait until the game comes out before rubbishing
> their claims first, seems that whatever Rockstar do they get slagged
> off for trying to push the boundaries of their games, which is a
> shame.
And I'm not slagging off Rockstar either, I have the utmost respect for them. But I'm willing to point out a few faults in their games as well, as I have an open mind.
> I think we should wait until the game comes out before rubbishing
> their claims first, seems that whatever Rockstar do they get slagged
> off for trying to push the boundaries of their games, which is a
> shame.
And I'm not slagging off Rockstar either, I have the utmost respect for them. But I'm willing to point out a few faults in their games as well, as I have an open mind.
I was refering to all the PS2 GTA games, including San Andreas. Liberty City and Vice City both had huge airports that were pretty useless, therefore a waste of space. Plus Vice City had the huge beach which didn't really need to be as big.
Going by that I think it's sensible to asume that San Andreas will feature a huge, pointless airport. Unless you can use the Jumbo's of course, but the biggest thing we've been able to fly so far has been a small Cessna type thing. So a small private airport would suffice.
I fail to see how a huge desert is going to be usefull as in any normal circumstance, deserts have nothing in them, hence why they got their name. A countryside could be decent if you can go Mountain biking or trail biking, but if they make it too big, it's going to be another waste of space.
But hey, I'm still looking forward to San Andreas regardless, because I still enjoyed the previous games. I was just trying to point out that a large section of the GTA games are pretty pointless.
Going by that I think it's sensible to asume that San Andreas will feature a huge, pointless airport. Unless you can use the Jumbo's of course, but the biggest thing we've been able to fly so far has been a small Cessna type thing. So a small private airport would suffice.
I fail to see how a huge desert is going to be usefull as in any normal circumstance, deserts have nothing in them, hence why they got their name. A countryside could be decent if you can go Mountain biking or trail biking, but if they make it too big, it's going to be another waste of space.
But hey, I'm still looking forward to San Andreas regardless, because I still enjoyed the previous games. I was just trying to point out that a large section of the GTA games are pretty pointless.
No, I think you'll find he's talking about SA.
Quote "Also, there's going to be a huge countryside seperating all these cities "
Quote "Also, there's going to be a huge countryside seperating all these cities "
No, I think you'll find he's talking about Vice City and Liberty City. When you take away all the areas like the airports that aren't really used for anything, the cities aren't really as big as they first seem.
They better put some decent stuff in these desert and countryside areas or it's just gonna become a chore travelling back and forth from the cities. Hopefully there'll be a train service or plane service that doesn't take so long to get from one city to the other.
They better put some decent stuff in these desert and countryside areas or it's just gonna become a chore travelling back and forth from the cities. Hopefully there'll be a train service or plane service that doesn't take so long to get from one city to the other.
Lou Role wrote:
> the cities really aren't as big as Rockstar make out.
And you know this how ....
I think we should wait until the game comes out before rubbishing their claims first, seems that whatever Rockstar do they get slagged off for trying to push the boundaries of their games, which is a shame.
> the cities really aren't as big as Rockstar make out.
And you know this how ....
I think we should wait until the game comes out before rubbishing their claims first, seems that whatever Rockstar do they get slagged off for trying to push the boundaries of their games, which is a shame.
Page: