The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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 3'.
I was a very good game and i only ever finished it 97%
Anyway back to the really thing
what was your favorite part of GTA 3 ?
My favorite part was when i first played on it i remember it so well it had just loaded up and i skiped the start so i had missed it unknowingly (sp) and so i carryed on playing. Right at the start on the ver first mission i thought 'oh great its one of these games where your allways in a mission, thinking of GTA 1 & 2, i thought i suppose it would be a good change and carried on playing soon to realise that it wasn't and i should have watched the start and i ended up watching the start about 50 times when i just got onto the last island and thought i wounder where that bank is i looked for hours on end and i eventually gave up went on the internet and had a look if anyone knew where it was and they did.
So behind the cliff's i went to find this place taking about 100 attempts to get round i eventually got there and acctually landed on the island got out thinking i've got to be careful because the ground ist solid and guess what. i could have sworn i saw and alien thier. anyway GREAT GAME.
Anyway back to the really thing
what was your favorite part of GTA 3 ?
My favorite part was when i first played on it i remember it so well it had just loaded up and i skiped the start so i had missed it unknowingly (sp) and so i carryed on playing. Right at the start on the ver first mission i thought 'oh great its one of these games where your allways in a mission, thinking of GTA 1 & 2, i thought i suppose it would be a good change and carried on playing soon to realise that it wasn't and i should have watched the start and i ended up watching the start about 50 times when i just got onto the last island and thought i wounder where that bank is i looked for hours on end and i eventually gave up went on the internet and had a look if anyone knew where it was and they did.
So behind the cliff's i went to find this place taking about 100 attempts to get round i eventually got there and acctually landed on the island got out thinking i've got to be careful because the ground ist solid and guess what. i could have sworn i saw and alien thier. anyway GREAT GAME.
Page:
Wakka wrote:
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> Did you have to save up? I had $244,456 going into the Bomb da Base
> missions.
>
> $244,456 looks made up but anyway i had about 1 million i have 16
> million now (completed and alot of jumps, packages etc.)
>
> It's not made up.
i never said it was i said it looks made up purely because of the number.
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> Did you have to save up? I had $244,456 going into the Bomb da Base
> missions.
>
> $244,456 looks made up but anyway i had about 1 million i have 16
> million now (completed and alot of jumps, packages etc.)
>
> It's not made up.
i never said it was i said it looks made up purely because of the number.
THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> Did you have to save up? I had $244,456 going into the Bomb da Base
> missions.
>
> $244,456 looks made up but anyway i had about 1 million i have 16
> million now (completed and alot of jumps, packages etc.)
>
> It's not made up.
>
> i never said it was i said it looks made up purely because of the
> number.
What is wrong with the number?
> Wakka wrote:
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> Did you have to save up? I had $244,456 going into the Bomb da Base
> missions.
>
> $244,456 looks made up but anyway i had about 1 million i have 16
> million now (completed and alot of jumps, packages etc.)
>
> It's not made up.
>
> i never said it was i said it looks made up purely because of the
> number.
What is wrong with the number?
Well it's very precise - almost as if you plucked it right out of the air. Though, having said that, if you were to actually check that on the game, chances are that it would be something like that and not a whole number.
Anyway, why don't we knock this little debate on the head here? Can you believe that you two are arguing over the validity of a variable number?
Personally, I don't think it looks made up.
Anyway, why don't we knock this little debate on the head here? Can you believe that you two are arguing over the validity of a variable number?
Personally, I don't think it looks made up.
Wakka wrote:
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> Did you have to save up? I had $244,456 going into the Bomb da Base
> missions.
>
> $244,456 looks made up but anyway i had about 1 million i have 16
> million now (completed and alot of jumps, packages etc.)
>
> It's not made up.
>
> i never said it was i said it looks made up purely because of the
> number.
>
> What is wrong with the number?
244,456
1. constant increase
2. triple number
3. 456
4. to accurate
and anyway just thought it looked a wierd number.
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> THE MADMAN wrote:
> Wakka wrote:
> Did you have to save up? I had $244,456 going into the Bomb da Base
> missions.
>
> $244,456 looks made up but anyway i had about 1 million i have 16
> million now (completed and alot of jumps, packages etc.)
>
> It's not made up.
>
> i never said it was i said it looks made up purely because of the
> number.
>
> What is wrong with the number?
244,456
1. constant increase
2. triple number
3. 456
4. to accurate
and anyway just thought it looked a wierd number.
After selling my PS2 im now thinking of buying the GTA Double Pack, on that GAMEing site they're doing this deal of the day thingy and you get to vote for a game. One of them are GTA : DP today so im hoping it'll get voted today.
you should never of sold your ps2, you should have keeped it and got GTA 3 although vice city is out and san adreas (sp) is out around 23rd of october this year and i don't want this one hyped up, thats why vice city "wasn't" good. people said too much about it and i thought it was a great and i would play it again but i don't have the time.
He sold it because it was broken.
And GTA 3 beats Vice City with a large and painful bat.
And GTA 3 beats Vice City with a large and painful bat.
Mav wrote:
> He sold it because it was broken.
>
> And GTA 3 beats Vice City with a large and painful bat.
No its not. i can't be botherd to explain but just listen Vice city was overrated and seen as not too good but in fact it was amazing it was just some stupid dense people that thought that because they thought it wasn't how good it should have been they said it was boring and cheap.
> He sold it because it was broken.
>
> And GTA 3 beats Vice City with a large and painful bat.
No its not. i can't be botherd to explain but just listen Vice city was overrated and seen as not too good but in fact it was amazing it was just some stupid dense people that thought that because they thought it wasn't how good it should have been they said it was boring and cheap.
I think Mav is right about GTA3 being better than Vice City. In terms of level design and mission structure it was far superior, it didn't have as many weapons but what it did have was more than adequete, who needs 3 different types of Shotgun? They all do the same job. The story itself was also much better.
In Vice City you had to rise to power, but once you got there you didn't feel as though you were 'the daddy'. But when you finished GTA3 you felt a sense of power, after all you had just anhialated the Cartel and disrupted the Mafia big time. Basically, you felt as though you had really kicked some ass.
I'm not completely knocking Vice City though as I think it's still a very good game, just not as good as it's bigger, better brother.
In Vice City you had to rise to power, but once you got there you didn't feel as though you were 'the daddy'. But when you finished GTA3 you felt a sense of power, after all you had just anhialated the Cartel and disrupted the Mafia big time. Basically, you felt as though you had really kicked some ass.
I'm not completely knocking Vice City though as I think it's still a very good game, just not as good as it's bigger, better brother.
I think Lou Role's pretty much hit the nail on the head here.
There were too many weapons in Vice City, and the design of the city was really poor in places, with lots of repetition and dull textures. GTA 3's islands may have been smaller, but what they lacked in size, they made up for in quality. It had a really personal feel - it was easy to remember where places were, and each area had interesting aspects and locations. The same goes for the weapons; in GTA 3, you knew what each one did, knew what was best for a certain situation and used all of them - more than can be said for the confusingly large amount in Vice City.
I also thought that the missions and storyline (especially the Mafia) were better in GTA 3, as they had more of a gritty feel and, even though you knew it wouldn't make much difference, the sense of professionalism made you want to complete each one as best as you can. Unfortunately, I just didn't feel that in Vice. The missions had the right ideas, but when executed they just weren't as much fun or "important". This flaw can probably also be attributed to the lacklustre level design.
It was the little things too, like the radio stations, vehicles, characters, exploration, trains and mini-sections (stunts, secret packagages, etc) that I liked better in GTA 3. There were some genuinely positive improvements in Vice, such as the gameplay dynamics (jumping out of moving cars, and shooting people through their windscreens was very cool), motorbikes and helicopters but they weren't implemented so well that I felt I couldn't do without them. The game was put together in less than a year and, unfortunately, it shows.
Vice City somewhat reminds me of what I heard in an interview with Lawrence Fishburne regarding The Matrix Reloaded:
"Fans of the original will love Reloaded; it has more of everything. More action, more pace, more style, more revelations and twists... it expands upon the relationship between Neo and Trinity. It's essentially the original Matrix, to the power of ten."
But which is the better film?
There were too many weapons in Vice City, and the design of the city was really poor in places, with lots of repetition and dull textures. GTA 3's islands may have been smaller, but what they lacked in size, they made up for in quality. It had a really personal feel - it was easy to remember where places were, and each area had interesting aspects and locations. The same goes for the weapons; in GTA 3, you knew what each one did, knew what was best for a certain situation and used all of them - more than can be said for the confusingly large amount in Vice City.
I also thought that the missions and storyline (especially the Mafia) were better in GTA 3, as they had more of a gritty feel and, even though you knew it wouldn't make much difference, the sense of professionalism made you want to complete each one as best as you can. Unfortunately, I just didn't feel that in Vice. The missions had the right ideas, but when executed they just weren't as much fun or "important". This flaw can probably also be attributed to the lacklustre level design.
It was the little things too, like the radio stations, vehicles, characters, exploration, trains and mini-sections (stunts, secret packagages, etc) that I liked better in GTA 3. There were some genuinely positive improvements in Vice, such as the gameplay dynamics (jumping out of moving cars, and shooting people through their windscreens was very cool), motorbikes and helicopters but they weren't implemented so well that I felt I couldn't do without them. The game was put together in less than a year and, unfortunately, it shows.
Vice City somewhat reminds me of what I heard in an interview with Lawrence Fishburne regarding The Matrix Reloaded:
"Fans of the original will love Reloaded; it has more of everything. More action, more pace, more style, more revelations and twists... it expands upon the relationship between Neo and Trinity. It's essentially the original Matrix, to the power of ten."
But which is the better film?
Page: