The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
is gta3 any good on pc
Page:
philgash123 wrote:
> Thanks for the praise for my GTA3 post hobbo. Your entitled to your
> opinion IB, just as long as you know that the majority of the world is
> against you!
>
> Phil
I think you will find that of the 6 billion people in the world, only a tiny minority own GTA3. It is you who has the majority against you.
> Thanks for the praise for my GTA3 post hobbo. Your entitled to your
> opinion IB, just as long as you know that the majority of the world is
> against you!
>
> Phil
I think you will find that of the 6 billion people in the world, only a tiny minority own GTA3. It is you who has the majority against you.
Heh, that's my blood brother. :-D
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game,
> meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different
> style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an
> opinion.
>
> I said don't look at it from a software engineer's point of view, and
> what do you do? you start talking about the game engine!! grrr
Looking at it from a software engineer's point of view is the best way to put it in perspective. This enables you to see the differences that are sometimes hazy to people who just play the game.
>
> yah, this argument has gone on far too long. Fun though it was, we
> should draw it to a close.
Agreed, we'll soon find something else equally riveting to argue about no doubt. ;)
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game,
> meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different
> style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an
> opinion.
>
> I said don't look at it from a software engineer's point of view, and
> what do you do? you start talking about the game engine!! grrr
Looking at it from a software engineer's point of view is the best way to put it in perspective. This enables you to see the differences that are sometimes hazy to people who just play the game.
>
> yah, this argument has gone on far too long. Fun though it was, we
> should draw it to a close.
Agreed, we'll soon find something else equally riveting to argue about no doubt. ;)
Little Hobbo wrote:
> No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game,
> meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different
> style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an
> opinion.
I said don't look at it from a software engineer's point of view, and what do you do? you start talking about the game engine!! grrr
yah, this argument has gone on far too long. Fun though it was, we should draw it to a close.
> No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game,
> meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different
> style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an
> opinion.
I said don't look at it from a software engineer's point of view, and what do you do? you start talking about the game engine!! grrr
yah, this argument has gone on far too long. Fun though it was, we should draw it to a close.
Oops, soz about double post, never done that before.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> How a game is made and how it is played are two entirely different
> things. Try not to look at this from a software engineer's
> perspective. the 3d movement did little else other than make GTA3 play
> slower, but look much prettier than it's predecessors.
No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game, meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an opinion.
>
> bored now.
Me too, shall we call it quits here?
> How a game is made and how it is played are two entirely different
> things. Try not to look at this from a software engineer's
> perspective. the 3d movement did little else other than make GTA3 play
> slower, but look much prettier than it's predecessors.
No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game, meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an opinion.
>
> bored now.
Me too, shall we call it quits here?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> How a game is made and how it is played are two entirely different
> things. Try not to look at this from a software engineer's
> perspective. the 3d movement did little else other than make GTA3 play
> slower, but look much prettier than it's predecessors.
No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game, meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an opinion.
>
> bored now.
Me too, shall we call it quits here?
> How a game is made and how it is played are two entirely different
> things. Try not to look at this from a software engineer's
> perspective. the 3d movement did little else other than make GTA3 play
> slower, but look much prettier than it's predecessors.
No it didn't, it affected the whole physics engine of the game, meaning that actions, driving atc are all in a totally different style. As I said before, this is a factual statment, not an opinion.
>
> bored now.
Me too, shall we call it quits here?
Little Hobbo wrote:
> It's not an optical illusion. By making comments like that you merely
> show how naive you are in the gaming field. I'm not going to spend
> hours typing out examples, but think logically about how the move to
> 3D affects the game properties, and how it changes the way you have to
> play it. I am stating this as fact not an opinion, and I have been
> involved in creating 3D games so I should know.
How a game is made and how it is played are two entirely different things. Try not to look at this from a software engineer's perspective. the 3d movement did little else other than make GTA3 play slower, but look much prettier than it's predecessors.
bored now.
> It's not an optical illusion. By making comments like that you merely
> show how naive you are in the gaming field. I'm not going to spend
> hours typing out examples, but think logically about how the move to
> 3D affects the game properties, and how it changes the way you have to
> play it. I am stating this as fact not an opinion, and I have been
> involved in creating 3D games so I should know.
How a game is made and how it is played are two entirely different things. Try not to look at this from a software engineer's perspective. the 3d movement did little else other than make GTA3 play slower, but look much prettier than it's predecessors.
bored now.
Insane Bartender wrote:
>
> I can understand that looking different doesn't mean playing
> different. The new view changes the way you view the game. I know this
> may FEEL like the game is playing different, but it's an optical
> illusion.
It's not an optical illusion. By making comments like that you merely show how naive you are in the gaming field. I'm not going to spend hours typing out examples, but think logically about how the move to 3D affects the game properties, and how it changes the way you have to play it. I am stating this as fact not an opinion, and I have been involved in creating 3D games so I should know.
>
I just deemed it to ludricous a comment to deem
> worthy of reply.
Fair enough
>
> I can understand that looking different doesn't mean playing
> different. The new view changes the way you view the game. I know this
> may FEEL like the game is playing different, but it's an optical
> illusion.
It's not an optical illusion. By making comments like that you merely show how naive you are in the gaming field. I'm not going to spend hours typing out examples, but think logically about how the move to 3D affects the game properties, and how it changes the way you have to play it. I am stating this as fact not an opinion, and I have been involved in creating 3D games so I should know.
>
I just deemed it to ludricous a comment to deem
> worthy of reply.
Fair enough
Page: