Will Rockstar always be the gold standard for Free roam/Sandbox games?

[Deuterion]

no its not better. than both GTA and red dead.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I personally just don't rock with GTA or RDR2 because Rockstar makes the most technically impressive worlds and basically does jack shyt with it. Los Santos in GTA 5 was so gorgeous and detailed that I remember driving by many of the locations in the game in real life here in Cali. As far as gameplay and mission structure was concerned though it fell off a cliff after the first heist.

So many of the missions were Go to Y and drive/fly/boat to X, kill the guys, steal the thing, drive/fly/boat back to Y. This game play doesn't take advantage or even interact with the beautiful landscapes that Rockstar created. When you get in one of these missions you go from one of the most technically amazing open worlds to a linear shooting game that requires auto-aim to make up for its deficiencies.

It's basically the Fast and Furious of games, it's awesome if you don't expect too much from it. I personally think GTA IV was a much better game because at least it had a compelling narrative.

 

[rapbeats]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I personally just don't rock with GTA or RDR2 because Rockstar makes the most technically impressive worlds and basically does jack shyt with it. Los Santos in GTA 5 was so gorgeous and detailed that I remember driving by many of the locations in the game in real life here in Cali. As far as gameplay and mission structure was concerned though it fell off a cliff after the first heist.

So many of the missions were Go to Y and drive/fly/boat to X, kill the guys, steal the thing, drive/fly/boat back to Y. This game play doesn't take advantage or even interact with the beautiful landscapes that Rockstar created. When you get in one of these missions you go from one of the most technically amazing open worlds to a linear shooting game that requires auto-aim to make up for its deficiencies.

It's basically the Fast and Furious of games, it's awesome if you don't expect too much from it. I personally think GTA IV was a much better game because at least it had a compelling narrative.

its the online version. the online version aint going to be all that. the story mode is where they make use of the world. they are literally trying to figure out what they should do with the world when we're talking online. they are trying to stay true to the title and theme. basically still stuff be a criminal master mind now cover your tracks by turning into a business man. the problem with gta online is the question of do you want this to be an eve online (persistent world massively multiplayer online role-playing game) or not just what it currently is? To me it seems like some where in between. but if it were the former. online would actually cost more than purchasing a few shark cards. there would be a monthly subscription service. etc. are we ready for that in GTA? hhmmmm... maybe....maybe not.

I mean it could be virtual monopoly with guns and cars. lol. the problem with gta is more of a decision than a problem. you dont interact with others online unless they team up with you and do missions or business missions/stuff to create more money for you in the long run and short run for your team. and everyone online can become your enemy by bothering you..killing you, at times messing with your missions. but only rarely competing with you unless its a race or a (new) boss battle that gta spawns from time to time. i dont get why they spawn boss battles. when we're bosses on the game. the battle is simple. if i'm trucking my goods from point A to point Z. and you roll up on me and take it. its now your stuff. the idea that they dont realllly want you jacking people is hilarious to me. but maybe thats due to the shark cards thing. they dont want people raging out and low key pulling up on other players in real life because they bought a bunch of shark cards to build up their business and someone hi jacked them on the way to the drop off point.

 

[Deuterion]

its the online version. the online version aint going to be all that. the story mode is where they make use of the world. they are literally trying to figure out what they should do with the world when we're talking online. they are trying to stay true to the title and theme. basically still stuff be a criminal master mind now cover your tracks by turning into a business man. the problem with gta online is the question of do you want this to be an eve online (persistent world massively multiplayer online role-playing game) or not just what it currently is? To me it seems like some where in between. but if it were the former. online would actually cost more than purchasing a few shark cards. there would be a monthly subscription service. etc. are we ready for that in GTA? hhmmmm... maybe....maybe not.

I mean it could be virtual monopoly with guns and cars. lol. the problem with gta is more of a decision than a problem. you dont interact with others online unless they team up with you and do missions or business missions/stuff to create more money for you in the long run and short run for your team. and everyone online can become your enemy by bothering you..killing you, at times messing with your missions. but only rarely competing with you unless its a race or a (new) boss battle that gta spawns from time to time. i dont get why they spawn boss battles. when we're bosses on the game. the battle is simple. if i'm trucking my goods from point A to point Z. and you roll up on me and take it. its now your stuff. the idea that they dont realllly want you jacking people is hilarious to me. but maybe thats due to the shark cards thing. they dont want people raging out and low key pulling up on other players in real life because they bought a bunch of shark cards to build up their business and someone hi jacked them on the way to the drop off point.

I never said anything about online.

 

[rapbeats]

I never said anything about online.

oh well. gta 5 story mode is still solid. not as good as others from the past i agree. But they did come up with a new take with the 3 different characters switching thing.

 

[kdslittlebro]

I think they should have multiple voice options, but I dont mind a silent guy if they are just going to get a generic white guy

fukk the kind of voice. Having a voice at all means dialogue choices are limited to what they can get recorded.

 

[Stir Fry]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I personally just don't rock with GTA or RDR2 because Rockstar makes the most technically impressive worlds and basically does jack shyt with it. Los Santos in GTA 5 was so gorgeous and detailed that I remember driving by many of the locations in the game in real life here in Cali. As far as gameplay and mission structure was concerned though it fell off a cliff after the first heist.

So many of the missions were Go to Y and drive/fly/boat to X, kill the guys, steal the thing, drive/fly/boat back to Y. This game play doesn't take advantage or even interact with the beautiful landscapes that Rockstar created. When you get in one of these missions you go from one of the most technically amazing open worlds to a linear shooting game that requires auto-aim to make up for its deficiencies.

It's basically the Fast and Furious of games, it's awesome if you don't expect too much from it. I personally think GTA IV was a much better game because at least it had a compelling narrative.

+1 I also hate that they billed the campaign as a heist game and I think it only had one or maybe two other heist missions after the opening sequence lol

 

[Deuterion]

+1 I also hate that they billed the campaign as a heist game and I think it only had one or maybe two other heist missions after the opening sequence lol

Yeah man and the only heist that was any good was the first one. I don’t remember it verbatim but I remember it offered you a lot of creativity to get it done. Every other heist was a regular ass mission that let you select a couple options like who is gonna do what and like if you would drive or swim. It was such an oversell...the game was a 2002 Corolla in a fresh coat of paint. I haven’t even beat it yet cuz I got bored half way through.

 

[Kairi Irving]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I personally just don't rock with GTA or RDR2 because Rockstar makes the most technically impressive worlds and basically does jack shyt with it. Los Santos in GTA 5 was so gorgeous and detailed that I remember driving by many of the locations in the game in real life here in Cali. As far as gameplay and mission structure was concerned though it fell off a cliff after the first heist.

So many of the missions were Go to Y and drive/fly/boat to X, kill the guys, steal the thing, drive/fly/boat back to Y. This game play doesn't take advantage or even interact with the beautiful landscapes that Rockstar created. When you get in one of these missions you go from one of the most technically amazing open worlds to a linear shooting game that requires auto-aim to make up for its deficiencies.

It's basically the Fast and Furious of games, it's awesome if you don't expect too much from it. I personally think GTA IV was a much better game because at least it had a compelling narrative.

Ehh I somewhat agree with it being the FnF of video games but it's also an Insult to GTA.

GTA has had a lot of quality stories

FnF became bland after Tokyo Drift in storytelling

 

[Deuterion]

Ehh I somewhat agree with it being the FnF of video games but it's also an Insult to GTA.

GTA has had a lot of quality stories

FnF became bland after Tokyo Drift in storytelling

I meant overall but I understand your point. GTAIV’s story had me so gripped man... I felt for Niko Bellic, seeing him evolve over time was so dope.

 

[Doodle]

GTA V is a good game but it sometimes comes across as an apology to the people who hated GTA IV. I loved GTA IV as well and it has the best video game depiction of NYC I have seen. IV got a lot of hate so I see why they made it the way they did. RDR2 however to me was a return to what made their older games great even if they abandoned it for online.

 

[Collateral]

GTA V is a good game but it sometimes comes across as an apology to the people who hated GTA IV. I loved GTA IV as well and it has the best video game depiction of NYC I have seen. IV got a lot of hate so I see why they made it the way they did. RDR2 however to me was a return to what made their older games great even if they abandoned it for online.

True Crime New York City owns that title

 

[feelosofer]

Yes, because Rocktar doesn't just create an open world, they fill it with stories, compelling characters general world building. Bethesda does that to some extent but it doesn't grip you as much emotionally.

 

[Dushane Hill]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I personally just don't rock with GTA or RDR2 because Rockstar makes the most technically impressive worlds and basically does jack shyt with it. Los Santos in GTA 5 was so gorgeous and detailed that I remember driving by many of the locations in the game in real life here in Cali. As far as gameplay and mission structure was concerned though it fell off a cliff after the first heist.

So many of the missions were Go to Y and drive/fly/boat to X, kill the guys, steal the thing, drive/fly/boat back to Y. This game play doesn't take advantage or even interact with the beautiful landscapes that Rockstar created. When you get in one of these missions you go from one of the most technically amazing open worlds to a linear shooting game that requires auto-aim to make up for its deficiencies.

It's basically the Fast and Furious of games, it's awesome if you don't expect too much from it. I personally think GTA IV was a much better game because at least it had a compelling narrative.

I agree with this with regards to GTA V....essentially it was just a very nice looking empty world with not much to do. But I don't get how you can say the same about RDR2, it was a dramatic improvement from GTA V in every single aspect.

 

[Kairi Irving]

I agree with this with regards to GTA V....essentially it was just a very nice looking empty world with not much to do. But I don't get how you can say the same about RDR2, it was a dramatic improvement from GTA V in every single aspect.

I'm not sure if it's me but I feel like RDR2 is what GTA V would've been like if they continued the realistic approach from IV

 

[Doodle]

I'm not sure if it's me but I feel like RDR2 is what GTA V would've been like if they continued the realistic approach from IV

I can assure RDR3 won't be like that. They will give in to the backlash like they did with GTA V.