The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Thats right bozo, the type of game is the same, but the 3D views and
> environments make the game play differently. Can you understand
> that?
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.
> But didn't you miss out part of the argument. Or is that your way of
> conceding?
the part where you convinced yourself that I made an error in a dramatic and purposeful effort to make myself look stupid? No, I didn't miss it out, I just deemed it to ludricous a comment to deem worthy of reply.
> Thats right bozo, the type of game is the same, but the 3D views and
> environments make the game play differently. Can you understand
> that?
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.
> But didn't you miss out part of the argument. Or is that your way of
> conceding?
the part where you convinced yourself that I made an error in a dramatic and purposeful effort to make myself look stupid? No, I didn't miss it out, I just deemed it to ludricous a comment to deem worthy of reply.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Steal cars, hit people, find gun, evade/kill police. 3d or not, it's
> the same thing. The only difference I saw is that GTA3 plays at a more
> reasonable pace, while GTA was frantic, GTA3 isn't quite as much.
Thats right bozo, the type of game is the same, but the 3D views and environments make the game play differently. Can you understand that?
> Fans of the series will buy the game. Anyone else will read reviews of
> it and make up their own mind. I am not responsible for the minds of
> others.
Fair enough, I'll concede that point to you.
But didn't you miss out part of the argument. Or is that your way of conceding?
> Steal cars, hit people, find gun, evade/kill police. 3d or not, it's
> the same thing. The only difference I saw is that GTA3 plays at a more
> reasonable pace, while GTA was frantic, GTA3 isn't quite as much.
Thats right bozo, the type of game is the same, but the 3D views and environments make the game play differently. Can you understand that?
> Fans of the series will buy the game. Anyone else will read reviews of
> it and make up their own mind. I am not responsible for the minds of
> others.
Fair enough, I'll concede that point to you.
But didn't you miss out part of the argument. Or is that your way of conceding?
Little Hobbo wrote:
> When you come out with sentences like that I truly doubt if you have
> really played the game. The gameplay is entirely different, the whole
> game has changed it's style. You really have no idea what you are
> talking about.
Steal cars, hit people, find gun, evade/kill police. 3d or not, it's the same thing. The only difference I saw is that GTA3 plays at a more reasonable pace, while GTA was frantic, GTA3 isn't quite as much.
> It's not your problem, it's you creating a problem for other people.
Fans of the series will buy the game. Anyone else will read reviews of it and make up their own mind. I am not responsible for the minds of others.
> When you come out with sentences like that I truly doubt if you have
> really played the game. The gameplay is entirely different, the whole
> game has changed it's style. You really have no idea what you are
> talking about.
Steal cars, hit people, find gun, evade/kill police. 3d or not, it's the same thing. The only difference I saw is that GTA3 plays at a more reasonable pace, while GTA was frantic, GTA3 isn't quite as much.
> It's not your problem, it's you creating a problem for other people.
Fans of the series will buy the game. Anyone else will read reviews of it and make up their own mind. I am not responsible for the minds of others.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> No, it changed the way the game looked. The gameplpay is, in essence,
> very much the same.
When you come out with sentences like that I truly doubt if you have really played the game. The gameplay is entirely different, the whole game has changed it's style. You really have no idea what you are talking about.
>
>
> Is that what you really meant, or just some weak excuse? Hmmm......
>
> Yes, I meant to contradict myself you useless muppet.
As I thought, just a weak excuse to unburden yourself of a foolish earlier comment.
>
>
> Because some people do not have the intelligence to determine
> whether
> a game is good or not for themselves, and when they listen to you
> sl@g
> off GTA3, some will believe you.
>
> And that is my problem how exactly?
It's not your problem, it's you creating a problem for other people.
> No, it changed the way the game looked. The gameplpay is, in essence,
> very much the same.
When you come out with sentences like that I truly doubt if you have really played the game. The gameplay is entirely different, the whole game has changed it's style. You really have no idea what you are talking about.
>
>
> Is that what you really meant, or just some weak excuse? Hmmm......
>
> Yes, I meant to contradict myself you useless muppet.
As I thought, just a weak excuse to unburden yourself of a foolish earlier comment.
>
>
> Because some people do not have the intelligence to determine
> whether
> a game is good or not for themselves, and when they listen to you
> sl@g
> off GTA3, some will believe you.
>
> And that is my problem how exactly?
It's not your problem, it's you creating a problem for other people.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Yes, but it totally changed the way the game is played, so that IS
> innovative.
No, it changed the way the game looked. The gameplpay is, in essence, very much the same.
> Is that what you really meant, or just some weak excuse? Hmmm......
Yes, I meant to contradict myself you useless muppet.
> Because some people do not have the intelligence to determine whether
> a game is good or not for themselves, and when they listen to you sl@g
> off GTA3, some will believe you.
And that is my problem how exactly?
> Yes, but it totally changed the way the game is played, so that IS
> innovative.
No, it changed the way the game looked. The gameplpay is, in essence, very much the same.
> Is that what you really meant, or just some weak excuse? Hmmm......
Yes, I meant to contradict myself you useless muppet.
> Because some people do not have the intelligence to determine whether
> a game is good or not for themselves, and when they listen to you sl@g
> off GTA3, some will believe you.
And that is my problem how exactly?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Going 3d was hardly an original move, more like following the trend.
Yes, but it totally changed the way the game is played, so that IS innovative.
> All games contain *should* contain some element of strategy, it's what
> makes them playable. Apologies for missing a word.
Is that what you really meant, or just some weak excuse? Hmmm......
> You'd be surprised, some gullible fools believe everything they
> read.
>
> And that is my problem how exactly?
Because some people do not have the intelligence to determine whether a game is good or not for themselves, and when they listen to you sl@g off GTA3, some will believe you.
> Going 3d was hardly an original move, more like following the trend.
Yes, but it totally changed the way the game is played, so that IS innovative.
> All games contain *should* contain some element of strategy, it's what
> makes them playable. Apologies for missing a word.
Is that what you really meant, or just some weak excuse? Hmmm......
> You'd be surprised, some gullible fools believe everything they
> read.
>
> And that is my problem how exactly?
Because some people do not have the intelligence to determine whether a game is good or not for themselves, and when they listen to you sl@g off GTA3, some will believe you.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> We are talking about the whole game here, not the concept. Now the
> game has turned 3D that is another innovative turn, thus making it
> original, except for maybe Driver 2, like I mentioned before.
Going 3d was hardly an original move, more like following the trend.
> Not all games contain strategy, and you directly contradicted yourself
> in that sentence, so unsure are you of what you really mean.
All games contain *should* contain some element of strategy, it's what makes them playable. Apologies for missing a word.
> You'd be surprised, some gullible fools believe everything they read.
And that is my problem how exactly?
> We are talking about the whole game here, not the concept. Now the
> game has turned 3D that is another innovative turn, thus making it
> original, except for maybe Driver 2, like I mentioned before.
Going 3d was hardly an original move, more like following the trend.
> Not all games contain strategy, and you directly contradicted yourself
> in that sentence, so unsure are you of what you really mean.
All games contain *should* contain some element of strategy, it's what makes them playable. Apologies for missing a word.
> You'd be surprised, some gullible fools believe everything they read.
And that is my problem how exactly?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> No, GTA was original. Ipso Facto, GTA3 is not.
We are talking about the whole game here, not the concept. Now the game has turned 3D that is another innovative turn, thus making it original, except for maybe Driver 2, like I mentioned before.
>
>
> GTA3 can't offer strategy because it's not a strategy game. But
> it's
> playability and involvement are huge selling factors.
>
> All games contain strategy------------GTA3 does not.
Not all games contain strategy, and you directly contradicted yourself in that sentence, so unsure are you of what you really mean.
> I'd sooner smash my hdd over my knee. If people intend to buy the
> game, they won't listen to me about it anyway.
You'd be surprised, some gullible fools believe everything they read.
> No, GTA was original. Ipso Facto, GTA3 is not.
We are talking about the whole game here, not the concept. Now the game has turned 3D that is another innovative turn, thus making it original, except for maybe Driver 2, like I mentioned before.
>
>
> GTA3 can't offer strategy because it's not a strategy game. But
> it's
> playability and involvement are huge selling factors.
>
> All games contain strategy------------GTA3 does not.
Not all games contain strategy, and you directly contradicted yourself in that sentence, so unsure are you of what you really mean.
> I'd sooner smash my hdd over my knee. If people intend to buy the
> game, they won't listen to me about it anyway.
You'd be surprised, some gullible fools believe everything they read.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> GTA3 is neither unoriginal nor listless. It's idea was unique at the
> time of conception, and with the possible exception of Driver 2, the
> whole creation is original.
No, GTA was original. Ipso Facto, GTA3 is not.
> GTA3 can't offer strategy because it's not a strategy game. But it's
> playability and involvement are huge selling factors.
All games contain strategy, whether labelled strategy games or not. If a game has no strategy, it isn't worth playing. Tetris had strategy, Mario Bros. had strategy, Gran Tourismo has strategy. GTA3 does not.
> Then get it for PC. Or if you don't, then just don't try and put
> others off it with your criticism.
I'd sooner smash my hdd over my knee. If people intend to buy the game, they won't listen to me about it anyway.
> GTA3 is neither unoriginal nor listless. It's idea was unique at the
> time of conception, and with the possible exception of Driver 2, the
> whole creation is original.
No, GTA was original. Ipso Facto, GTA3 is not.
> GTA3 can't offer strategy because it's not a strategy game. But it's
> playability and involvement are huge selling factors.
All games contain strategy, whether labelled strategy games or not. If a game has no strategy, it isn't worth playing. Tetris had strategy, Mario Bros. had strategy, Gran Tourismo has strategy. GTA3 does not.
> Then get it for PC. Or if you don't, then just don't try and put
> others off it with your criticism.
I'd sooner smash my hdd over my knee. If people intend to buy the game, they won't listen to me about it anyway.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> What good is a game that has you bored to tears after playing it for
> so short a time? It offers me nothing. It really doesn't light my
> fire. If you like unoriginal, average looking, listless games, then
> GTA3 is for you.
GTA3 is neither unoriginal nor listless. It's idea was unique at the time of conception, and with the possible exception of Driver 2, the whole creation is original.
> Personally, I like some playability, startegy, and
> involvement in a game. GTA3 seems to offer none of this.
GTA3 can't offer strategy because it's not a strategy game. But it's playability and involvement are huge selling factors.
> The "only reason to buy a PS2" doesn't inspire me to bother.
Then get it for PC. Or if you don't, then just don't try and put others off it with your criticism.
> What good is a game that has you bored to tears after playing it for
> so short a time? It offers me nothing. It really doesn't light my
> fire. If you like unoriginal, average looking, listless games, then
> GTA3 is for you.
GTA3 is neither unoriginal nor listless. It's idea was unique at the time of conception, and with the possible exception of Driver 2, the whole creation is original.
> Personally, I like some playability, startegy, and
> involvement in a game. GTA3 seems to offer none of this.
GTA3 can't offer strategy because it's not a strategy game. But it's playability and involvement are huge selling factors.
> The "only reason to buy a PS2" doesn't inspire me to bother.
Then get it for PC. Or if you don't, then just don't try and put others off it with your criticism.
Page: