In retrospect did this really deserve a 98 Metascore, if not what game does?

IV and V deserve their scores because they're both great games. There hasn't been a bad mainline GTA.

Hell no
SA and V are both miles better

Yeah, Still one of the best to this day

GTA V was the perfect balance between GTA IV's Realism & classic Arcadey gameplay. All they need to do is fix the story, linear missions & outdated controls

Fuck no its easily the worst GTA game other than 3 which has just aged horribly.

it deserves more

>In retrospect did this really deserve a 98 Metascore

Yep

Doom I
Doom II
Doom 64

Not to go all Freud, but sometimes a bad game is just a bad game.
I enjoyed Star Wars Demolition as a kid, but later I realized it was shit.

The first time you played this, the first time you watched Niko use each step when walking up stairs, the first time you ran over Hasidic Jews with Roman's taxi and watched them realistically bounce off of the hood and bumper - absolutely revolutionary, it deserves its 98.

The story didn't really hook me, felt more like a chore. Kind of an interesting setting, dark though

It is very good. Back then I took what I saw from the scores. If they were high and also looked into regular YT channels that reviewed new games to determine if I gave games a shot.

With GTAV, I already knew it was a hit before it game out having played GTA throughout my teen years. It deserves it's score.

>Thinking that metascores based on journacucks opinions matter

Burnout 3.

Attached: 1557595482118.png (816x788, 143K)

>Jak 3
>God Hand
>Comix Zone

A year ago, this would've been a definite nope across the board. Funny how this game has almost done a complete 180 in reception after a youtuber said they liked it...

sure

Attached: GTAIV 7_7_2019 1_51_19 PM.jpg (3840x2160, 820K)

No, every mission was the same.

I'd rather have missions that use the core mechanics than random gimmicky shit like operating a crane.

Nah, it's a great game but the sandbox was so basic that it spawned Saints Row 2.

Yea Forums, take the challenge. download both 4 and 5 and play them simultaneously throughout the day. I guarantee you'll find yourself enjoying 4 more than you do 5.

I used to think shooting in 5 was better, but after returning back to 4 I soon realized that was false. 4 has a certain realism to how gun fights play out, which makes it more enjoyable than having super AI peg you the moment your baby toe sticks out. If you're actually running and zig zagging, they can't get a lock and won't hit you. that alone makes the game more enjoyable than 5.

story wise, it's really up to the player, but I prefer the darker, grittier timeline that involves working with mafia hitman and dope pushers. 5 has tool many cartoony as fuck characters that make the entire trip feel like a comedy show. you don't really care who you shoot, where as 4 made you question multiple times if you were doing the right thing by killing this person, or letting them live.

I won't get into cars too much, because I know everyone has their opinion. just my take: 4's driving is an acquired taste that not everyone will like.

tl;dr 4, imo, is better than 5

Attached: Dq1JBAoUcAELT2Q.jpg (900x1200, 176K)

Skyrim Legendary edition
Skyrim Special edition
Skyrim VR

GTA IV is a pretty good game, it just didn't push the bar high enough after how amazing 3/VC/SA were.

>all they need to do is fix 90% of the game but it's the best one
Hello based retard

GTA V's mission were shit too.

IMO for it's time, GTA was a marvel of modern video game technology.

Honestly, all the games with 97 and above are pure garbage

>V

Boy, stop.

>4's driving is an acquired taste that not everyone will like.

That the type of shit people say about surströmming. 4's driving is BAD. Sure you can learn how to deal with it and adapt but that shit is so bad it tarnishes the entire fucking game. I live in brooklyn close to where the begining of the game is based off of, I want to like that game so bad.

I agree with everything said here, i think if someone thinks 5 is better its recency effect. 4 is the better game and when you include TLaD and BoGT it head over heels has more variety in gameplay and more fun weapons.

It's significantly more polished and mechanically complex than the 3D games. Not to mention there are a lot more smaller ways you can interact with the world. The only reason SA had as much content as it did was to mask how basic the core gameplay is.

Attached: _-Urban-Chaos-Riot-Response-PS2-_.jpg (800x640, 134K)

if I'm allowed to do this from both sides, I would say that 5's driving is more enjoyable for cruising, racing and just driving around the open world. but from a storyline point of view, 4's realism of cars being heavy, driving like shit and just being awful to handle in tough situations, added to my character immersion.

driving lambos and other sports cars in 5 is a ton of fun, and feels realistic at times. but then you jump into a tow truck, and that fucking thing feels like you're moving at 150mph, it just ruins it for me.

just another point-- 4's cops are also better. I miss having police walk the streets, drive around and be seen.

>New Vegas
>Supreme Commander Forged Alliance
>Age of Empires 2

4's driving is FUN

Attached: explosion.webm (1280x720, 2.72M)

What exactly about webm related is too difficult for you to learn?

Attached: gta4turismo3.webm (640x360, 2.86M)

GTA 4 is extremely forgettable, only thing i remember is that you're a war criminal and one of your friends gets murdered at the end

youtube.com/watch?v=IozQ437Nn6c

I really liked V's missions for the most part, even if they were gimmicky. They played like SA which also went overboard in some ways, but at least it made for a memorable experience. But then V screwed up by being a movie and not letting you make the character(s) your own. Though at least they were fun to observe from a distance, up to a point.

IV has everything going for it except for the missions - to a huge detriment. LC is very fun and comfy to drive around in and Radio Broker is one of the GOATs but the mission structure makes me want to put a bullet in my head.

Attached: 1539275262458.jpg (250x232, 6K)

God I want a IV remaster. The PS3 version looks and runs like complete shit.

V's crane mission is the absolute worst part of that game. There's nothing fun about that shit, and I honestly wish it didn't exist.

I had a lot of fun with the heist, but a lot of the setups were just awful to play through. Some felt like the equivalent of 'eat your veggies before you can have this ice cream'

No rockstar game is above 60 in my experience

>FireRed
>San Andreas
>Pro Skater 3

I dunno to me it's like an RC mission in VC/SA

if it wasn't surrounded by all that fucking walking and cringey as dialogue, I might enjoy it more.

Yes. The Rage engine was amazing. In 2019 it's still shitting on other engines tech

I feel like you're being a bit dramatic. I only played V for the first time earlier this year and it's definitely noticeable how deliberately paced/scripted the missions are, but the amount of "walking and talking" seemed about as much as in any other GTA game. If anything, the mid-mission autosaves made it so that you pretty much never hear the same bit of dialogue twice.

the mid-mission saves help, but that mission stands out more than the rest. the actual part with operating the crane is fun, but the walking and talking ruins it for me.

maybe it's because i've played through the game like 6 times already, but that part puts me off more than anything.

Mid mission saving ruins the mission design I feel. Having it discourages the creation of missions that can be beaten in 2 or 3 minutes. As dialogue heavy as IV, almost all of that dialogue is skippable and there are fewer heavily scripted missions overall. V seems to be the polar opposite. My favourite V missions are actually the assassination contracts solely because most of them let you approach the situation however you want.

>maybe it's because i've played through the game like 6 times already
yeah I can imagine. I was recently thinking about the replay value in one of these IV vs V threads and I realized that V has really poor replay value just because it will always play out the exact same way and you can't even speed things up by knowing what to do - like you can in San Andreas. on my 10th playthrough, I can breeze through Lost Santos in a couple hours when it took me a week back in the day. But in V, you have to go through all the motions whether you like it or not.

>God I want a IV remaster
go play it then its been out since 2009

Attached: starjunction.png (1920x1080, 3.96M)

>But in V, you have to go through all the motions whether you like it or not.
another issue I have with the game. not everything feels bad to replay through, but then you start remembering shit you're unable to skip.

not a bad game at all, just not my top favorite gta.

don't have a PC that can run it comfortably

>worst 3D GTA game has the highest metascore which is just shy of perfect
What's the function of video game journalism anymore?

>I don't have a PC that can run a 10 year old game
How do you "people" even manage?

easy, my PC is a media server/emulation/shitposting machine

GTA V is a literal skinner box.

No matter how you play, you get punished by the game and told to buy shark cards. When you cave in and buy them another update comes out and you are punished into buying more.

Attached: 1361928321277.gif (250x250, 993K)

not in the single-player

Replay value seems to be a lost art in games these days (with a few exceptions). I get the impression that it doesn't occur to a lot of devs that some people will want to play their games more than once. This is why a lot of games become significantly worse on subsequent playthroughs.

Yes even in single player

Unless you glitch the stock market you will never have enough money to buy the properties.

*the most expensive properties
>No matter how you play, you get punished by the game and told to buy shark cards.
this is just a straight-up lie though. I vaguely remember being told about shark cards ones but you make it sound like they are popping up every 10 seconds.

Every ingame radio station has the shark card advert playing each rotation.

What are you even trying to argue? Its still the most popular game on earth and making billions of dollars off these scummy practices. Love or hate it, it works.

all I'm saying is you're being a drama queen and making shit up

that's your own fault

Attached: moresoul.png (1920x1080, 1.66M)

nah
the plot was shit
it tried to hard to be realistic
everything was brown and dull
characters were shit
options didn't matter and lead to the same shit
the gameplay was also stiff, only good thing was the driving
chinatown wars was more fun
people only pretend to like IV because V is popular right now, but will praise V once VI drops

>runs the same as the sequel that came out 6 years later
yeah no it's just a shitty ass port

Yes, it's almost perfect besides most cars turning too slowly and looking goofy while doing so, dipping into the ground on one side like a boat on water.
Pc port has more annoyances though, some fixable like radio tracks being cut and some without any solution such as mouse deadzone, you just can't do micro adjustments to the left as the aim won't budge unless you move your mouse a certain distance. The sensitivity is also halved when using the internet and you gotta deal with mouse accel when zooming in with a sniper.

>not Tony Hawk Underground

Wow, you must be a real fan.

For the time, yes.
>best physics engine
>best urban open world
>well written story
>hours worth of gameplay

It came out 2006, just remember 2 years prior, polygons were still used, and MGS2 was the best looking game prior.

IV is an interesting character study but the plot would be a better fit to some moviegame series. I love the game for what it is. theres plenty of activities to do like races and socializing and other stuff but the general atmosphere is so grim most of the time I dont feel like doing any of them. its a genuienly depressing game and if thats what housers were aiming for then kudos to them. otherwise its a rather unfortunate mainline entry to the series.

All video games are skinner boxes

lol the game gives you incentive to play its content? the nerve

Attached: Grand Theft Auto V 7_16_2019 7_40_55 AM.jpg (3840x2160, 1.57M)

>shit port
based retard

how is it not a shit port?

only shit part of it is securom. download a scene release and it's smooth as butter.

Works on my machine

only post 00s silly zoomer

Attached: 1474734921478.jpg (500x500, 68K)

>complaining about outdated controls with V
All the other games are MILES worse in the controls department. Only IV is even remotely playable anymore, the rest are absolute dogshit that we only tolerated back then because we didn't know better. Yes, even SA.

How is it a shit port? Just because the game doesn't hit 200fps isn't a fault of the port, that's a fault of the engine.
A shit port would be inferior to the console original. GTA4's PC version is objectively superior.

Not really

Nothing, I do that all the time in IV. Doesn't mean that the game controls well. You can do it much more fluidly in V since you don't have to fight the pants on head retarded driving.

>glitch
You don't have to "glitch" at all. The game gives you a set of missions to manipulate the stock market and tells you that outright. If you're too much of a retard to take the hint, you're enough of a retard to buy the shark cards anyway.

>fight the driving
sounds like you're struggling with it. you know 4 has the option to take taxis if you're bad at games and need it played for you?

Attached: Untitled3.jpg (1920x1080, 355K)

No, I can control the cars. That doesn't make it enjoyable. You can get from point A to point B in Superman 64, that doesn't mean that Superman 64 controls well. Quit being retarded.

You're not enjoying driving? Maybe you should drive a little faster. It's not the game's fault you can't drive fast, user.

Attached: starjunction2.png (1920x1080, 2.49M)

Of all the obvious bugs and flaws you think driving is bad in a game thats 90% driving?

Have you considered going to see a doctor? You may be mentally/physically disabled.

> Seething contrarian whose assmad that his shit games aren’t considered good by people who actually affect worldwide opinions