The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
When someone goes on about something for so long that it makes you want to scream it usually means one of two things:
1. It's a complete pile of pants.
2. It's the best thing since, well, something really good.
You know what I'm talking about by now I'm sure - yes, it's another blimmin' GTA3 post.....
When I first spied this title several months ago I wasn't really all that fussed. I like the original version quite a lot although it wasn't exactly game of the decade.
Controversial? Yes
Different? Yes
Best game ever? Certainly not.
Screenshots of GTA3 didn't really look particularly impressive and in many ways I still stand by my initial reaction - Driver 2 with an 18 licence.
I've played it now though and I'm going to retract everything negative that I've said about this game so far - it's absolutely fantastic.
The thing is, I don't really know where to begin. Yeah so you can shoot people, you can steal cars and then run over the owner, you can beat people to death with baseball bats and you can even kill Police officers. That's pretty much the controversial part of the game and yes - it's all quite grim and disgraceful depending on how you look at it.
In reality though - it is just a game. The point is that you CAN go and do these things and it's not going to result in a lifelong prison sentence. To cover that the game has even been given an 18 licence.
So is it just being controversial for the sake of it?
I honestly believe that this is not the case at all.
The vehicle handling in GTA3 is superb - I've played driving games in which the vehicles handle less realistically than in this title!
Radio stations (several of them) can be accessed, you can even nick a Taxi and raise some money by picking people up like a normal cab driver would.
GTA3 is genius, the first part of Liberty City is huge and there is an intelligent game underneath the obvious violence.
If you're not 18 don't buy it, if you're going to go out and pull people out of their cars after playing it then don't buy it either - if you've got a wicked sense of humour and enjoy a superb game then go and get this now.
I honestly thought that this was going to be a case of "If you liked the first two then you'll love this". It's just not so - EXCELLENT.
1. It's a complete pile of pants.
2. It's the best thing since, well, something really good.
You know what I'm talking about by now I'm sure - yes, it's another blimmin' GTA3 post.....
When I first spied this title several months ago I wasn't really all that fussed. I like the original version quite a lot although it wasn't exactly game of the decade.
Controversial? Yes
Different? Yes
Best game ever? Certainly not.
Screenshots of GTA3 didn't really look particularly impressive and in many ways I still stand by my initial reaction - Driver 2 with an 18 licence.
I've played it now though and I'm going to retract everything negative that I've said about this game so far - it's absolutely fantastic.
The thing is, I don't really know where to begin. Yeah so you can shoot people, you can steal cars and then run over the owner, you can beat people to death with baseball bats and you can even kill Police officers. That's pretty much the controversial part of the game and yes - it's all quite grim and disgraceful depending on how you look at it.
In reality though - it is just a game. The point is that you CAN go and do these things and it's not going to result in a lifelong prison sentence. To cover that the game has even been given an 18 licence.
So is it just being controversial for the sake of it?
I honestly believe that this is not the case at all.
The vehicle handling in GTA3 is superb - I've played driving games in which the vehicles handle less realistically than in this title!
Radio stations (several of them) can be accessed, you can even nick a Taxi and raise some money by picking people up like a normal cab driver would.
GTA3 is genius, the first part of Liberty City is huge and there is an intelligent game underneath the obvious violence.
If you're not 18 don't buy it, if you're going to go out and pull people out of their cars after playing it then don't buy it either - if you've got a wicked sense of humour and enjoy a superb game then go and get this now.
I honestly thought that this was going to be a case of "If you liked the first two then you'll love this". It's just not so - EXCELLENT.
Page:
WÚÛkiee M¯nßÜÄR wrote:
Look at Tony Martin - whether it's true or not, he
> shouldn't have to claim diminished responsibility to get his sentence reduced,
> because he should never have been locked up anyway.
Damn right!
What stupid bloody jury could find him guilty!? Bunch of tw@ts.
Sorry about the language, but this just shows how fudged up our justice system is.
I won't go on, as I can't get what I want to say past the filter, and this is the wrong forum as well....
Look at Tony Martin - whether it's true or not, he
> shouldn't have to claim diminished responsibility to get his sentence reduced,
> because he should never have been locked up anyway.
Damn right!
What stupid bloody jury could find him guilty!? Bunch of tw@ts.
Sorry about the language, but this just shows how fudged up our justice system is.
I won't go on, as I can't get what I want to say past the filter, and this is the wrong forum as well....
MR.COATES wrote:
> That was a rather serious reply Wookiee!!!
Well, it's quite a serious subject. Look at Tony Martin - whether it's true or not, he shouldn't have to claim diminished responsibility to get his sentence reduced, because he should never have been locked up anyway.
> That was a rather serious reply Wookiee!!!
Well, it's quite a serious subject. Look at Tony Martin - whether it's true or not, he shouldn't have to claim diminished responsibility to get his sentence reduced, because he should never have been locked up anyway.
I'd have to agree with you both. Not sure about the padded cell business though, Blistad - there may be circumstances specific to the case that require consideration.
Totally agree.
I spent last night on top of the multi-storey car park in Staunton Island taking people out with the siper rifle.
Doesn't mean I'll be doing it for real any time soon.
I don't think that many people who do these things actually are affected by the games. Most of them must be unstable anyway, and those that aren't probably blame games in the hope of a reduced sentence due to diminished responsibility, because "Game X made me do it".
Complete nonsense.
The problem these days is that it's far too easy to get away with things by claiming 'temporary insanity' and the like. Fine, if they were 'temporarily insane', lock them in a padded cell rather than a prison cell - just don't let them walk free!
I spent last night on top of the multi-storey car park in Staunton Island taking people out with the siper rifle.
Doesn't mean I'll be doing it for real any time soon.
I don't think that many people who do these things actually are affected by the games. Most of them must be unstable anyway, and those that aren't probably blame games in the hope of a reduced sentence due to diminished responsibility, because "Game X made me do it".
Complete nonsense.
The problem these days is that it's far too easy to get away with things by claiming 'temporary insanity' and the like. Fine, if they were 'temporarily insane', lock them in a padded cell rather than a prison cell - just don't let them walk free!
Absolutely, the Krays didn't play GTA-32 before going on their route of crime did they?!!
It's just something to blame isn't it when some child picks up a shotgun and shoots some people randomly.
"Oh, he was playing that awful GTA3 game before he did it, that's the reason why, it MUST be that".....
It's just something to blame isn't it when some child picks up a shotgun and shoots some people randomly.
"Oh, he was playing that awful GTA3 game before he did it, that's the reason why, it MUST be that".....
Thank you.
It bugs me that people always assume that criminals are copying what they see in films or games. Why do they never consider that the producers of films or games aren't copying what they see happening in everyday life?
To me, that's far more likely.
It bugs me that people always assume that criminals are copying what they see in films or games. Why do they never consider that the producers of films or games aren't copying what they see happening in everyday life?
To me, that's far more likely.
People were shooting each other, running people down in cars, and beating people with baseball bats long before videogames existed.
Blaming games for copycat violence is nonsense. People who do so have it all back to front... games are but a mirror of today's society, not the cause of it.
Blaming games for copycat violence is nonsense. People who do so have it all back to front... games are but a mirror of today's society, not the cause of it.
I honestly believe that 18 is over-cautious. I'm 27 and quite frankly I didn't think that there was much in here to shock or upset at all.
You hit someone with a car, they bleed - it's a common sense and true to life thing isn't it?!
If limbs were to bounce of the car and babies could be shot then perhaps it would be a bit much but remember this:
Saving Private Ryan is a 15 rated film.
The first 15 minutes of that film are much more horrific than anything that you will encounter in this 'game'.
It's all just a case of keeping it in perspective - does the death and violence become worse just because you're in control of it? I would argue that no it doesn't - as long as you haven't got a problem with it.
You hit someone with a car, they bleed - it's a common sense and true to life thing isn't it?!
If limbs were to bounce of the car and babies could be shot then perhaps it would be a bit much but remember this:
Saving Private Ryan is a 15 rated film.
The first 15 minutes of that film are much more horrific than anything that you will encounter in this 'game'.
It's all just a case of keeping it in perspective - does the death and violence become worse just because you're in control of it? I would argue that no it doesn't - as long as you haven't got a problem with it.
Page: