PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Capcom on August 29, 2006, 10:52:55 PM
-
Anyone else playing this? I have always wanted to like GTA games, and so far this is the closest have come to enjoying them. Not quite as linear, and I don\'t get sick playing it from bad frames per second.
PS the character creation is the shit.:thumb:
-
i only played the 360 demo. Thought the handling felt like shit (the game overall..not just vehicles).
I love the GTA series, so its hard for me to like this. definitly waiting for the next gta installment.
-
To each their own, but think if you give the controls a chance. They work out fine. I feel more in control now than ever did in GTA.
-
played the demo......zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
-
Have you been copy-n-pastin\' your own quotes from the last console war, mm? :)
Damn that search function!
-
well, 95% of console titles have the zzzzzzzzzzzzz effect on me, so figure the odds
-
Since when was GTA linear?
-
Good point, unless Saint\'s Row doesn\'t have a central storyline?
Saint\'s Row looked fun to me, but wow is it an obvious GTA rip off.
I saw the commercial. Even my mom thought it was a new GTA game, heh.
-
You bought a 360?
You\'re movin on up. Can\'t bring myself to buy one. Waiting on the Wii.
With that said, no interest in Saints Row here. Looks about like GTA , which I think is one of the single worst franchises (well, other than MGS and Final Fantasy)...
Then again, only game I\'ve played recently is CoV, still hooked on it for some reason.
-
Linear was a poor choice of words. The entire game world is open from the get go. So not forced to do missions to see more of the game world. Overall this game most closely resembles the original GTA. No motorcycles boats or planes. Minus the fact that the entire city is from the open. My largest complaints with GTA is the aiming system. It is fixed in SR which imho makes it a 100 times more enjoyable.
After about 20 hours played. One glaring fault stands out. They must have opted for 3 songs. It feels like everytime hop into a car the same 3 songs are playing. It is absolutly horrid after the first couple of hours.
Yeah lic broke down and bought one. My quit smoking present to myself. It spent the first month as a media center extension.
-
LIC, i don\'t see how you can call yourself a gamer and find no redeeming value in the MGS or FF series. it\'s one thing to just not like them, but the worst franchises?
honestly
-
LIC, i don\'t see how you can call yourself a gamer and find no redeeming value in the MGS or FF series. it\'s one thing to just not like them, but the worst franchises?
honestly
MGS = Piss poor story and a lot of talking.
FF (next generation ones!) = A lot of CG and boring ass turn based battles.
-
i rest my case.
-
MGS is hailed as one the greatest games for the PSX.
And it sucked.
Lol.
-
The Taj Mahal is a marvel of human ingenuity and worksmanship.
And it sucked.
LOL
-
Both of those franchises are showing their age imho.
Edit: Comparing a game to the Taj Mahal is retarded.
-
i rest my case.
As usual, you have no case, so that\'s okay.
-
so list some of your A+ franchises for me to cut down?
-
I think LiC took up with a troll sometime in the last few months, and there\'s some DNA seepage, it seems like he\'s making more and more outrageous viewpoints his own, and arguing in every thread he posts in.
That said, MGS is an amazing game, which really created a whole new gametype (splinter cell, thief, MGS). Even if it\'s not \'your type\' of game, you should be able to be objective enough to recognize it\'s innovation and popularity.
The FF series has something in it for almost any RPG player, whether you like the early ones or the later ones, but to say it\'s the worst franchise is way off. I\'ve liked pretty much all the FF series except for X-II and XI (don\'t like MMORPGs anymore), and while the FMV can be a bit distracting, it\'s also a great way to mix some movie-style narration into a game.
-
As cool as MGS is, it isn\'t terribly innovative. Everything that people love about it, it borrowed from other games (including Metal Gear 1 and 2, obviously) ...but, MGS applied them with a high level of polish.
Thief, you say? MGS and Thief came out at virtually the same time.
Splinter Cell is clearly a take on the stealth genre (as presented by MGS) and IMHO SC > MGS in the gameplay department. Though I must note that I have yet to play MGS3, and I hear it rox0rs.
-
I think LiC took up with a troll sometime in the last few months, and there\'s some DNA seepage, it seems like he\'s making more and more outrageous viewpoints his own, and arguing in every thread he posts in.
Blah, blah. Ban me then, I don\'t care.
If you had a clue, you\'d know I\'ve always said MGS and FF sucked ass and I will stick by that statement, until I like one of those franchises.
Blade nailed it, MGS is highly over-rated. It\'s been done before and it\'s been done better.
-
forgot to post something, LIC?
-
LiC: It\'s a little overrated due to the high-quality story (by video game standards :)) and cut-scenes.
The gameplay itself isn\'t bad, and perhaps was the apex of its genre in 1998. What I\'m saying is that there is virtually nothing innovative about MGS1 as Fatal was proposing there was.
-
Yeah lic broke down and bought one. My quit smoking present to myself.
I have a friend who did the same thing about three weeks ago. He signed up for month long Blockbuster rentals and bought Fight Night to go with it.
-
forgot to post something, LIC?
No, I simply didn\'t post it. Why? Because, unlike you, I don\'t get my panties in a bunch over an opinion. It\'s my opinion that MGS / GTA /FF are crap-ass series. I couldn\'t care less what you think of the franchises that I think are great.
-
it\'s hard to back up what you post
....shame
-
LiC: It\'s a little overrated due to the high-quality story (by video game standards :)) and cut-scenes.
The gameplay itself isn\'t bad, and perhaps was the apex of its genre in 1998. What I\'m saying is that there is virtually nothing innovative about MGS1 as Fatal was proposing there was.
Remember he\'s naming the Metal Gear franchise as one of the worst franchises ever, and I just don\'t think it\'s a defensible position. MG1 and MG2 are part of the franchise, so their innovation is part of the franchises contribution to gaming. When someone says an entire franchise deserves a \'worst game ever\' title, you really have to examine just what they\'re poo-pooing, from the earliest games in the series to the latest.
-
I have known LIC for a long time in real life. He has said this about these franchises since like day 3 after each of those games were released. He played each of them minus maybe FF wanting to like them. Just did not happen.
So give the guy a break. He dislikes some popular games. Apparently so do some of you.
-
he need a hug?
-
No, I don\'t need a hug.
I love how if game A is popular, then everyone must love it. It\'s that herd mentality that makes crap-ass games and crap-ass systems popular.
Remember he\'s naming the Metal Gear franchise as one of the worst franchises ever, and I just don\'t think it\'s a defensible position. MG1 and MG2 are part of the franchise, so their innovation is part of the franchises contribution to gaming. When someone says an entire franchise deserves a \'worst game ever\' title, you really have to examine just what they\'re poo-pooing, from the earliest games in the series to the latest.
What exactly did MGS bring to the table? Yeah, it made the stealth genre popular, but it\'s been done better and been done before.
-
Are you dissing the Metal Gear franchise, as started in 1987? Or MGS?
Metal Gear was the first stealth game of that variety. When I say that MGS is nothing new, I\'m saying it\'s a sequel.
Has the stealth genre been done before, and better? Hell yeah, in some respects. Mostly by sequels to MGS and far newer games, though. Which, of course, are also revered. I love Splinter Cell. I love Thief.
-
My opinion is more factual than your opinion.
-
MGS, it sucked.
Wanna know what else sucks?
Ico.
-
I don\'t know about that one. :)
-
i\'m not sure that mgs sucks,..i know when i bought it for psx back in 97, i thought it was one of the hottest games out, and for that time it was something truly innovational...fast forward some years later,...i did happen to purchase mgs 3, and while i did like the story and pretty graphics, for me it was a bit of a chore to play...why?.. the gameplay...the gameplay hasn\'t changed much from the that psx game in 97....it was a good game, but i ended up trading it in...if the series can freshen up the gameplay in the next series, maybe i\'ll support the franchise again...
-
:rofl:, lic
-
i\'m not sure that mgs sucks,..i know when i bought it for psx back in 97, i thought it was one of the hottest games out, and for that time it was something truly innovational...fast forward some years later,...i did happen to purchase mgs 3, and while i did like the story and pretty graphics, for me it was a bit of a chore to play...why?.. the gameplay...the gameplay hasn\'t changed much from the that psx game in 97....it was a good game, but i ended up trading it in...if the series can freshen up the gameplay in the next series, maybe i\'ll support the franchise again...
What are you talking about? The survival and camoflauge systmes are the biggest changes in MGS since it became 3D.
Sure the core movement and such hasn\'t changed, but how you play the game has. Not to mention the removal of a radar (though optional in the first two) required more instinctive and visual methods of survival.
The only thing I could think of that needed to be improved was camera manipulation and gun aiming. Which I\'m sure were improved in Substinance. Camera at least was drastically. Not having played it, I\'m not sure about the latter. Given the nature of the game, though, I don\'t think they wanted you to be shooting too much, though.
And Metal Gear Solid had a plethora of small innovations. As did the sequals. But then again, a lot of games feature small innovations. However, when the original Metal Gear was released, it had a major innovation (the introduction of a stealth element).
-
What are you talking about? The survival and camoflauge systmes are the biggest changes in MGS since it became 3D.
Sure the core movement and such hasn\'t changed, but how you play the game has. Not to mention the removal of a radar (though optional in the first two) required more instinctive and visual methods of survival.
The only thing I could think of that needed to be improved was camera manipulation and gun aiming. Which I\'m sure were improved in Substinance. Camera at least was drastically. Not having played it, I\'m not sure about the latter. Given the nature of the game, though, I don\'t think they wanted you to be shooting too much, though.
And Metal Gear Solid had a plethora of small innovations. As did the sequals. But then again, a lot of games feature small innovations. However, when the original Metal Gear was released, it had a major innovation (the introduction of a stealth element).
i agree with mostly everything you stated, but i guess my biggest problem from mgs 3 was the camera...maybe i\'ll rent substinance to see how much of an improvement it is...
-
I\'ll be trying out Saint\'s Row this week. Got it as a birthday present.
I want to finish Yakuza first, though. Despite its shortcomings, that game has a story that really sucks you in. I want to see how it turns out. And the main character is pretty bad ass.