Groundbreaking games

Mario 64

3 was groundbreaking and innovating for its time and IV was groundbreaking and innovating for its time. R* used to be very good at pushing the standards of game development forward

They both were, I just think 3 was even more, because there was nothing like it at the time.

I'd say the same about IV really. There were open worlds to be sure but nothing anywhere close to IV in what was going on under the hood. Like i said the car damage alone was more realistic than most racing/car based games and it was just a small part of the wider world. Same with how pedestrians reacted to being shot by reaching for their wounds/putting pressure on them, stumbling about in shock, etc etc. When you watch vids of actual gunfights GTA IV is actually STILL probably the closest a game has got to representing it accurately

Minecraft

Been playing through that recently using a tod cycle mod that brings the lighting up to a higher standard. Game is soooo much better and much more fun than GTA V was. Softbody physics on cars, enemies reactions to gunshots are great, driving felt smooth and cars all had different weights and handling that made you think before hijacking some junker to escape a squad of police. Characters were interesting and the story missions were actually fun. What was R* thinking???

Attached: xbox_burnout_3_take_down-110214.jpg (300x300, 25K)

microtransactions and casuals. Don't you just love being able to control pitch and yaw in a jump?

I love slamming into barricades and ejecting through my front windshield to avoid police blockades. Great tactical gameplay 10/10.

even if IV's driving wasn't all that realistic the best thing about it was that it had a legitamte skill curve that meant if you were a good driver you were a GOOD driver. On the multiplayer i regularly drove rings around who were driving super cars when i was in some shitty sedan. The car chases and shooting just added up to make for much more exciting gameplay than V

>Don't you just love being able to control pitch and yaw in a jump?
You could slightly nudge the car around in IV too, but yeah having to get up to the right speed and hit the ramp at a good angle to make a jump made it so much more rewarding when you landed one

you can only turn the wheels for a slightly better landing. I played it this morning and you have no in air control. When i found that you could on V I was legitimately shocked

>barreling toward ramp
>perfect angle, I'm about to soar
>van whips around the corner last second and I T-bone it
>Eject clear over the entire jump and land on my face wasted
Classic

>IV
>groundbreaking
>when it's one step forward two steps back from SA

some people just don't care about half implemented RPG elements in their citywide driving/shooting/rampage simulator. Boo hoo you couldn't get meaninglessly fat

Then it's a good thing they kept the jets, tanks and assault helicopters for rampaging, along with the flamethrower, chainsaw, and homing missile launcher

No I'm sure I nudged it

Dude Sex.

you realise none of these things have any meaning if the dynamics of the game they are in is crap? They were good in SA because they were a step up from the previous games running on the same engine. Meanwhile in V the flying boring as fuck and on the MP entirely dictated by microtransactions. Also the smaller range of guns in IV shot in a far more realistic and satisfying manner than any of the multitude of guns in SA and V. More pointless variety doesn't equal better automatically

I'm telling you absolutely 100 percent i literally played the game like 2 hours ago you can not nudge it whatsoever

At least V had flying, IV only had what, one helicopter in Gay Tony? Realism doesn't mean shit if it isn't fun, if realism was the end all be all then every time you get busted or wasted you should be spending twenty years in real time waiting for Niko to come back. Variety means that you get to have more choices to rampage with, and having more choices on what to do in-game is always a good thing

Pic unrelated. They took away fun features just so they could fit more graphics.

IV had helicopters in all 3 of the storylines and they'd spawn all over the map once you progressed in the game. They also spawned on the map in the multiplayer WITHOUT you having to go bother mom and pops for shark card money. Because what you're not mentioning here is that to use all this "variety" in GTA V online you have to pay with real money. Everything that was In IV was in it after you bought the game. IV also had far more satisfying helicopter physics and no need for planes considering its set in one city with one airport. Planes in V are so easy to fly its boring and you have no where to go in then so what the point? Again more doesn't always equal better quality

Why are you complaining about V and its predatory online when I'm talking about how IV regressed from SA?

because i loved GTA IV so much for its sterling physics and sandboxyness but mostly it had so much longevity because of its online. Utilising that world with your friends or randomers was just so amazing it was literally and absolutely 1 bazillion times more fun that the already fun SA. All the SA gimicks you are talking about were all well and good bu the way they fit into the structure and dynamics of the overall game made them less enjoyable than the smaller range of gimicks that IV provided. Moslty because IV provided other people to gimick about with. When they added them back in V they simultaneously ruined the dynamics with microtransactions and a physics downgrade and so despite HAVING jetpacks etc you just cant have as much fun in V as you could in IV. The regression you are talking about it the items within the structure of the game and not the actual game itself

nice bait

>half implemented RPG elements
so what about the half-assed girlfriends who had a predetermined amount of conversations and would stay dead silent forever after you had exhausted them all?

yeah literally ignored them and didn't feel like i missed out on anything

Oh, I thought you were only comparing about the single-player modes of each game. I agree that IV had better multiplayer than SA (apart from maybe the online SA mod), but basegame was seriously gimped compared to SA's

it was gimpid in scale and far far outstripped it in what was going on under the hood. driving IV smaller range of cars was more satisfying because they felt far more distinct than SA and likewise with the shooting.

I disagree, I felt like both had cars that were different only because of different classifications (i.e. all sedans feel like sedans but SUVs feel different from sedans). Weapons feel pretty similar on regards to how they handle in SA and IV, but SA had more options to choose from. I do believe that the gunplay in IV was one of the good improvements they did though

>no need for planes considering its set in one city with one airport
Let's be real, they didn't let you fly the planes taxing at the airport because of 9/11

crowbat is based and aryan

GTA IV was a masterpiece

AND WE DON'T ANY OF THIS SHIT NOWADAYS! Why the fuck did they regress, this shit was cool, t-boning a car and having people die from the impact or shooting them in a non-lethal area and having the paramedics help them, PRANK CALLING the paramedics or actualy calling the cops on bad guys and instegating the two of them to fight, those car deformations, the small things like parking your car with the engine on for a quick gettaway, and I havn't even got started on those fun as fuck physics, in conparison I was heavily disapointed with V.

Attached: 1553621142800.jpg (219x250, 7K)

San andreas was garbage and the only people who dont consider it the worst gta are kids

SUPAMARIOBRUDAS

how is it the worst GTA

wrong. It had better physics but that was all that stood out. I was completely underwhelmed when I played GTAIV on release. Compared to SA it was a big step back in nearly every way.

people who say this don't really appreciate games they appreciate jetpacks within games.

yeah I'm glad I appreciate finer things like reading satire internet webpages, watching a cutscene of Kat Williams, and having to put my in-game phone on silent to stop side-characters bothering me.

if the physics and graphics and sound design didn't impress you in GTA IV then of course the game didn't impress you because tat was literally what was so mindblowing. it had all these things done better in a free roaming sandbox game than all the corridor shooter/walking simulators of the time. it was a technological masterpiece

yet for all its technicalities it failed to be as good a game as SA by a large margin.

i think we just have to agree to disagree because i think it womps on all the GTA games before and since. SA was good but after playing IV playing S felt like a massive but hollow experience.

>it was a humungous step forward in game design.
In what way? Rockstar games don't even have basic world state persistence, a feature other open world games have had since 1981. Nothing you do matters. If you kill a pedestrian and walk away, the pedestrian will 'reset' and respawn. Your actions have no effect on the game world. It's the most shallow and simplistic approach to an open world game possible.

There is also the fact that missions in Rockstar games take place in what is essentially an alternate dimension completely separate from the game world. By contrast, other open world games have missions that are seamlessly integrated in the game world and if you fail, the game simply continues and adjusts to your actions rather than sending you back in time with a mission failure screen like you would see in a Rockstar game.

>play a rockstar game
>do a mission
>it's a chase
>if you lose track of your target for a few seconds, you get a mission failure
>if you are separated from your npc buddies, you get a mission failure
>basically, there's only one completely linear way to do missions, and the slighest diversion results in a mission failure. There's no room whatsoever for any freedom or improvisation in gameplay
>virtually every mission in every rockstar game ever made is designed like this

What exactly is the point of making an open world game, but making the missions in it completely linear? Why do people praise Rockstar's games as best in class open world games, when they arguably don't even qualify as open world games, since the actual missions take place in some separate dimension where you can't even interact with that open world without getting a mission failure?

Attached: 1550873895109.jpg (641x530, 36K)

there's more to a game than graphics

Simply put: The Multiplayer. You and you buddies could go and drive and shoot and just generally muckaround in this amazing physics engine and amazing setting and just do whatever the hell you wanted. Me and my friends came up with dozens of little minigames for ourselves many of which employed the detailed physics mechanics

>ITS NOT SA FEATURE FOR FEATURE SO ITS SHIT
Glad it’s not. If I wanted SA, Id play SA.

but what felt so hollow was mostly the physics. They affect everything and once the shooting went from blasting a guy with a shotgun to have hum clutch his wound and misfire his shotgun into his friends back and cars deforming depending on what you crash into SA just felt like carboard when you blasted a uy in the chest with a sawn off and he fell over forward exactly like that time you shot him with a pistol or crashing a car to see it deform exactly the dame each time until you lowered its healthbar enough for it to explode. It just felt boring after IV

First game that I played that felt like a vast improvement in graphics and physics and story, but was still a downgrade in it's basic gameplay. I still love GTA4 though. It's become one of my favorite GTA games, next to San Andreas.

>In many ways V actually felt like a step backwards
In most ways, really. Very disappointing.

All of this. SA’s shooting is pretty average and that sucks for a game that focuses a lot on gunfights. Remember that oversized AK? Unable to switch between dual/one gun? The terrible shooting that sounded like pellet guns? I like the game a lot but it’s definitely aged.

>"aged"
Aged has nothing to do with it. Max Payne came out 3 years before GTA San Andreas and has vastly better shooting.

Rockstar simply has never been a competent developer.

i remember that this was the first game that introduced me to the term "pop in"
and the car handling was bad.

>Unable to switch between dual/one gun
Thankfully now you only have the choice to use one gun

My excitement for V was indescribable after how much i loved IV. I literally googled it every day to see if their was another trailer or screenshots after the first ones games out. I bought the special edition and everything. However i knew there was something very wrong withing the first 5 minutes in the Yankton segment. By the time i'd played 10 hours i was simply gutted. When Online finally dropped all that time later my anti hype was complete. I've literally never pre-ordered a game since. What a money grubbing fuck up

>pre-ordering ever
You deserved that

what functional difference does dual wielding actually give you? remember how on SA you could lock on to a target (you needed to because the shooting was janky garbage otherwise) and if you turned your back on them you could fire your dual wields one into the air and the other into the ground. That was retarded

That makes me wonder if we've even had a groundbreaking game in the past 5 years. I can't think of any. Everything is at best an incremental improvement over the old. Well, Yea Forums?

Eh, I’m find with that. Popping Mozambique Drill > popping two guns.

man it was R*. They'd made GTA IV and RDR what could go wrong? We all learn the lesson some time

Hell yeah!

The presentation for GRAW was top notch

Attached: Ghost_Recon_Advanced_Warfighter_cover.jpg (220x272, 19K)

The physics in this game were truly next generation and it made the world feel so connected. Love the Euphoria engine

Red Dead Redemption 2 is next level

RDR feels like the ultimate in the incremental changes since GTA IV. It doesn't fell like a full departure AND it's multiplayer sucks mega ass

Higher firerate obviously

even the best devs make duds sometimes

but the shooting it literally just lock on and hold down the trigger button......

Like i said i thought i was safe and since then i've never made the same mistake since. I trusted R* implicitly back then. They were on fire ever since GTA 3 after all

Attached: 250px-World_of_Warcraft.jpg (250x378, 35K)

I remember playing this when I had acid reflux as a kid. I personally think this was much better than Mélee.

Attached: D79AF391-F178-4DA0-BA8C-5C2D6373905F.jpg (541x766, 93K)

My 7800GT bowed before it.