Serious flaws with GTA: VC

[Spank-A-Thon]

Now I realise this is probably going to stir things up somewhat (so I'll don my flame-proof jacket now), but I have to say I am only merely satisfied with Vice City. For me there are some serious flaws.

I really liked GTA3, the atmosphere was great, music was fantastic and the concept was really cool - but VC just hasn't had the same impact for me.

My biggest criticism has to be with the graphics. While I realise there is a lot going on, the draw-distance is pathetic. There has been no visible improvement over GTA3.

Similarly, I find the jerkiness and blur effects when turning (be that driving or in first person mode) to be very off-putting. If it can scroll smoothly when moving forwards, why not when turning?

Finally, I find the gameplay quite repetitive. Drive here, shoot that, drive there, shoot that, ad infinitum. However, I must add that some of the missions are quite exciting such as the shootout from the helicopter - it's just a shame that the majority of missions become very 'samey'.

However, I think what they have done with the soundtrack is amazing! Not only is the sheer amount of licensed tracks impressive, but the chat and ad jingles surpass that of GTA3.

I know a lot of you guys out there really rate this game, but for me it's not the massive improvement I was looking for. To me it seems more like GTA2, i.e. more of the same, rather than an evolution of the series.

Don't get me wrong - it is a good game. I just don't think it's as groundbreaking or good as GTA3...

- S

[jdkgts]

It seems like most people think it is better. I'll have to wait till I have the game.

[Sleazy P Martini]

I don't like the blur effect. I always turn it off. For me the bikes, helicopters, and MUCH improved radio stations were enough of an improvement for me. I also like the fact that you can go almost anywhere in the city (near the end) without being ambushed by gangs.

[The_Senator]

Although GTA 3 was ground-breaking and all that it was really a superb game. In the end it became so good the Developers couldn't top it in your opinion, BUT they obviously have in some places.

GTA VC is an improvement but you have to remember before you make something so tremendous you have to leave yourself some space to top it.

For example everyone remembers Michael Jackson's 'Thriller' and could anyone top it, no. Not even the man himself.

But I havel to agree with Sleazy, VC is a major improvement over all.

[jdkgts]

I just didn't like GTA3. It got old too fast for me. Hopefully with VC it won't be this way. I amy rent it first to be sure.

[AudioBoxer]

I havnt got my copy yet of VC but what do you mean by blur effect?

[twiztidfreak69er]

basically like he said blurry when you turn is kinda fuzzy or the lights and everything gets blurry my copy sometimes freezes up but rarelly

[Redpyramidhead]

Like Sleazy said, you can turn the blur effects off in the option menu under Display. It's called "Trails." Also when you turn it off the shapes in the game become less blurry and more defined and easier to look at and the colors become brighter and slightly more "modern." I am wondering if this feature was added to give the game an 80's film effect? I wasn't too happy with it, though, so luckily you can turn it off.



_RED_ stuff

[Vicious_2003]

For me VC is much MUCH better than GTA 3. I mean the addition of motor cycles alone is enough to make me buy the game, but then you add Purchasable properties , FLYABLE helicoptors, an actual use for all the money you earn, Better missions, More Cars, a city thats twice as large, more weapons, the ability to shoot out tires. etc . To ME theres no question, perhaps your being a little picky, I mean the graphics, statistically are improved slightly over GTA 3 (Barely Noticable yes, but lets not forget the city is twice as big in VC) . And to complain about the blur effect doesent seem right when you can turn it off, I dont think its a default setting anywyas is it ?. If so I never tuned it off and havent even noticed it.

[merylsilverburg]

Originally posted by Redpyramidhead
Like Sleazy said, you can turn the blur effects off in the option menu under Display. It's called "Trails." Also when you turn it off the shapes in the game become less blurry and more defined and easier to look at and the colors become brighter and slightly more "modern." I am wondering if this feature was added to give the game an 80's film effect? I wasn't too happy with it, though, so luckily you can turn it off.



_RED_ stuff

Omg, thank you for the information. From the beginning ever since I started playing, I hated the blurriness and got kinda sick because nothing was clear. Then I asked my sister what the hell is up with this and she said it was probably to give the game an '80s effect (like you said) since around that time the 80's had that hazy look to it. I didn't know you could turn it off so I was stuck playing with the blurriness till my eyes began to water. :P

Originally posted by Spank-A-Thon
I really liked GTA3, the atmosphere was great, music was fantastic and the concept was really cool - but VC just hasn't had the same impact for me.

Yes, I agree too...I still love the atmosphere of GTA3, with all the grime and dirt and darkness....to me, that's just terrific. I do like GTA: VC because it's something fresh and new and it's still quite enjoyable, but I would still prefer GTA3.

[Vicious_2003]

This makes no sence to me, can you honestly say that GTA 3 is better than Vice City !?. I mean c mon its the same game except DRASTICALLY improved in just about every possible way. Maybe its just that you cant relate with the time period perhaps . I know that I would prefer the game be set in modern time with modern music and what not but still this game is everything that GTA 3 wasnt , much MUCH better and I dont really see how anyone can hold a strait face and say otherwise . Its like getting a 5 dollar bill, then trading it in for a twenty and saying you liked the 5 better. To ME (My opinion) GTA 3 wasnt as good as it was hyped up to be and with the arrival of VC Its more clear now than ever. I didnt even finish GTA 3 because I got sick of the extremely repetitive missions , they compensated for lack of quality in the missions my making them more difficult. Also one of the things I like alot more in VC is that it seemed to me that the city was MUCH MUCH easier to navigate, didnt have to drive for a million miles to cross over form island to island and I didnt have to try and friggin memorize the pay-n-spray locations . Anyways thats what I think :P

[Spank-A-Thon]

Originally posted by Weapon_XZ84
This makes no sence to me, can you honestly say that GTA 3 is better than Vice City !?. I mean c mon its the same game except DRASTICALLY improved in just about every possible way. Maybe its just that you cant relate with the time period perhaps .Relating to the time period is not my problem considering I grew up in the 80's and listened to most of the music in the game when it first came out! Sometimes a game can be 'improved' but lose something too. I personally found Soul Calibur to be not as good as Soul Blade/Edge from a playability perspective. I found Gran Turismo 2 to be not as as good as GT1. In this case, VC seems to lack the atmosphere that sucked me into GTA3 - ergo, in my eyes, GTA3 is better irrespective of the 'improvements' made. Put simply, I enjoyed GTA3 more.I know that I would prefer the game be set in modern time with modern music and what not but still this game is everything that GTA 3 wasnt , much MUCH better and I dont really see how anyone can hold a strait face and say otherwise . Its like getting a 5 dollar bill, then trading it in for a twenty and saying you liked the 5 better. To ME (My opinion) GTA 3 wasnt as good as it was hyped up to be and with the arrival of VC Its more clear now than ever. For some reason, GTA: VC just doesn't have the same gritty and dark atmosphere that GTA3 did. The bright and cheerful Vice City is certainly a change, but I guess I've always prefered the darker, moodier games - VC isn't dark enough for me I guess.I didnt even finish GTA 3 because I got sick of the extremely repetitive missions , they compensated for lack of quality in the missions my making them more difficult. Also one of the things I like alot more in VC is that it seemed to me that the city was MUCH MUCH easier to navigate, didnt have to drive for a million miles to cross over form island to island and I didnt have to try and friggin memorize the pay-n-spray locations . Anyways thats what I think :P That's one thing I noticed too, and that's VC does seem a lot easier to navigate, less side streets and the like - but that's another crticisim of mine. City's do have side streets and the like. VC may be twice and big as Liberty City, but it doesn't feel like there is as much to it...

However, the addition of an in-game map is something that GTA3 was begging for - and I am chuffed to see it in VC.

By the way, thanks to those who pointed out you could turn of the trails - that should improve my experience considerably!

I'm glad to see that no-one has resorted to stupid comments like 'j00 suck - GTA: VC rulezzzzzzzz'.... At the end of the day, I'm only expressing my opinion - don't mean I'm right or wrong. Different strokes for different folks!

- S

[dan da man]

VC is better than gta3 VC just has a better impact with all the new things u can do

[Andi]

Originally posted by Spank-A-Thon
I know a lot of you guys out there really rate this game, but for me it's not the massive improvement I was looking for. To me it seems more like GTA2, i.e. more of the same, rather than an evolution of the series.

Don't get me wrong - it is a good game. I just don't think it's as groundbreaking or good as GTA3...

- S

Vice city ! is set in the 80's, so they cant put loads of new stuff in the game !

And it wont have the same impact ! Due to the reason been , you allready seen GTA3 in a 3D world ! Compared to looking down ! <<< They should have left the looking down view on for landing Helicopters !

All i can say is ! If They were making GTA 4 , before they started Vice City , then GTA 4 is guna be Awesome Think of all the improvements , (with todays Technology & Guns):laugh: :ghost:

[Sleazy P Martini]

Ah but I'm betting that the nice gloomy settings will return for GTA4. As for VC, I love the new cheery look. It's a breath of fresh air that keeps the series from getting too repetative. (but then again, its always been a little repetative mission wise) I've been a hardcore fan of the series from day one. (I loved the Russian radio from GTA2)

[MakgSnake]

Originally posted by Andi
All i can say is ! If They were making GTA 4 , before they started Vice City , then GTA 4 is guna be Awesome
I think thats why Rockstar didn't really put in their brains completely in ViceCity. I mean it is a sequal, but not a true sequal, that would be GTA4.

So, if they would have used all the "new" elements they have in VC, it would be hard for them to make even better ones for GTA4. I heard great things about Vice City. You can own things and actually be the boss around sounds great.

Vice City is basically an add on (expansion pack) kinda thing. Adding new elements which could be "possible" for the current game surrounding are put in.

If we want something groundbreaking, I guess we all have to wait for GTA4. I am sure that game will be groundbreaking. Hopefully.

[RobHardo]

hit pause and on the options menu turn off the trails, problem solved next question.

[Vicious_2003]

ONot a true sequel ?. How can you say its not a true sequel when it dwarfs GTA 3. Theres no question that VC has GTA 3 beat, argue as long as you want but youll still be wrong. Why all the negative comments towards VC anyways, it is an absolute masterpice of a game and Rock Star officials spoke out in a press conference saying "We didnt just make VC a rehash sequel" They went on to say how it dwarfs GTA 3 in just about every way. Lets face it, which is better or weather or not VC is a GREAT game isnt really up for debate, its a fact. (Not saying you cant list your opinions were all entitled to do that ) But can you really say that with all its improvements the stinking absence of the so called "Gloominess" really makes that much of a difference ?. Also Im willing to bet GTA 4 will be better than VC, but not much better. Theres not much more, gameplay wise they can add. Rockstar said they pulled no stops, left little room for improvement with Vice City. I think there just taking all that extra time to get more voice acting promos in and what not. I just dont get why theres always a good number of people in a group that like to go against the main stream opinion and focus soley on the games minor flaws, like "Gloominess" gimme a break ! :frust: :laugh:

[Spank-A-Thon]

Originally posted by Weapon_XZ84
ONot a true sequel ?. How can you say its not a true sequel when it dwarfs GTA 3. Theres no question that VC has GTA 3 beat, argue as long as you want but youll still be wrong.I think you're missing the point of a discussion forum - no one is 'right' or 'wrong' when it comes to opinion. Every opinion is valid.Why all the negative comments towards VC anyways, it is an absolute masterpice of a game and Rock Star officials spoke out in a press conference saying "We didnt just make VC a rehash sequel" They went on to say how it dwarfs GTA 3 in just about every way.So you'd rather have a forum where everyone waxes lyrical about how great GTA: VC is? That would get pretty boring quick. Take Final Fantasy VII, a masterpiece if there ever was one, yet there are lots of people who don't like it or see faults in the game. A forum full of positive threads would get boring very quickly.

As for Rockstar saying they didn't simply rehash GTA3 - what does that prove? They will say anything to get you to buy the game cos at the end of the day, they want your money.Lets face it, which is better or weather or not VC is a GREAT game isnt really up for debate, its a fact. (Not saying you cant list your opinions were all entitled to do that )You can't say it being a great games is fact because it isn't. You may think it's a great game, I merely think it's good. I think Final Fantasy VII is a great game, other people don't. In either case, it isn't fact but instead is an opinion.But can you really say that with all its improvements the stinking absence of the so called "Gloominess" really makes that much of a difference ?.To me it does, it affects the atmosphere of the game. The dark, seedy feel to GTA3 drew me into the game a lot more than the bright, cleaner looking GTA: VC. I really got into GTA3 - I'm nowhere near as into VC.I just dont get why theres always a good number of people in a group that like to go against the main stream opinion and focus soley on the games minor flaws, like "Gloominess" gimme a break ! :frust: :laugh: When you have a group of people there will always be others who have a differing opinion. That's human nature, and given this is a forum it's only natural to express that opinion in the hopes that discussion will be lively and balanced. A world where everyone thought the same would be extremely boring and lead to no innovation whatsoever. Any community needs people with differing opinions to thrive.

As for minor flaws, I could also mention the sluggish controls and the frustrating targeting system which although much improved, are still not as quick as say Devil May Cry. Perhaps I could mention the frame-rate barely reaching 30fps the majority of the time. I could mention the bland interior locations, or the fact the characters appear to have no fingers...

Yes there are some improvements - but adding such things as the ability to ride motorbikes hardly constitutes a massive improvement.

I have to agree with MakgSnake.Vice City is basically an add on (expansion pack) kinda thing. Adding new elements which could be "possible" for the current game surrounding are put in.I'm sorry if this upsets people but the improvements present do not represent a true sequel, but more of an expansion disc. If GTA3 is FIFA2002, then GTA:VC is FIFA2003... Naturally though, this is just my opinion...

- S

[XboxKiller]

Damn I fell sorry for you spank-a-thon. here you are saying that one of the best ps2 game is like FIFA 2003:shock:
come on its much better than that. maybe you just havent played the game that much because the first two minutes that I played it I was in love:love:
try doing something fun on it like flying the helicopter and crash into something and if that dont work then I am sorry put I got things to do like.........um.........oh yeah
PLAY THE BEST GAME ON THE PS2
VICE CITY

by the way I never knew that you could take the blurriness off the game I tried it yesterday and damn that was a sharp clean no mess gta game I have ever seen
xbox and gc owners eat your heart out;)

[Spank-A-Thon]

Originally posted by XboxKiller
Damn I fell sorry for you spank-a-thon. here you are saying that one of the best ps2 game is like FIFA 2003:shock:
come on its much better than that.

<snip>

by the way I never knew that you could take the blurriness off the game I tried it yesterday and damn that was a sharp clean no mess gta game I have ever seen
xbox and gc owners eat your heart out;) I think you misunderstand, I didn't mean to compare GTA: VC to FIFA2003 in terms of gameplay or anything. What I was getting at is that the difference between GTA 3 and GTA: VC is similar to that between FIFA versions. It's more of an update rather than a true evolution.

As for taking the Trails off, you're not kidding! As I discovered last night, it makes one hell of a difference to the game's looks! Far better now without all the blur!

[Infernus]

I like GTA3 better than VC in many ways.

My biggest problem with VC is the color scheme, putting Lazlow on VROCK instead of chat was not the best move and if you'll notice some of the missions are more thought out where others just seem thrown in.

The cars drive better, much, and the bikes are great.

My opinion is (and from knowing programmers) that the company didn't want to wait until the programmers were finished. And since the city is twice as big, why isn't there 200 packages instead of 100??? (see my above statement) And, why a pink arrow (which you can barely freaking see half the time) instead of blue?

GTA3 was simply more robust (in the programming term) than VC. My game has locked up on me, lags, half the time my helicopter is at Hyman, half the time not. He can jump five feet and be fine but if he stubs his toe you lose 5 points of your armor... what is that about??? The commercials and the talk radio isn't half as interesting or funny either. And when you buy Pole Position, why do I have to spend 5 minutes looking at the ugly girl to earn money? It could go a little faster... it was pretty darn boring.

VC is cool, but it isn't as good as I was hoping for either. I still rate it high, but it could have been better. Much better.

Infernus

[BlackThornn]

Comparing the two I think that VC is a better game while GTA III was a better experience. Mostly because GTA III was brand new.

Vice City seems like it was done before because it was. I've never thought of VC as a true sequel, but rather a very high quality expansion pack. I'm happy because I got more of what I got with GTA 3, only better. And it's the subtle improvements that make this game really great. (if magazines pass this up for some ridiculous FPS for game of the year, I'm going to start firebombing).

Despite loving this game, and having experienced none of the bugs that so many people complain about (maybe I'm blessed or somethin') there are some flaws in the game that I can point out..

As mentioned before, Vice City's a little bit TOO navigable, at least through most of the city. Get down around little haiti and havana and your driving experience makes like a hedge maze. I didn't even FIND sunshine autos until after I'd beaten the story missions.. (then again maybe that's just 'cause I suck at finding things. *shrugs*).

The game, despite being longer, also feels a little short. I think Rockstar relied too heavily on the free-form missions.. it makes it feel shorter. More "story" missions, and more properties, would have done a lot to alleviate this, obviously. Then again maybe it's just short because there is no learning curve this time. I think a lot of people forget that you had to learn how to do everything in GTA III, and in Vice City most people already know how to do the stuff.

The cops' AI is goo-... well, better, than it was in GTA III, but they're EVERYWHERE! I haven't been to Miami but I wasn't under the impression that there was a cop on every corner! Argh.. it gets frustrating sometimes. Especially when there are so many "rare" and/or expensive weapons to lose when you get busted/wasted.

The graphics are good, the weather effects are great.. but the blur in this game is worse, if anything. I turned it off after the first day, while I'd always left it on in Liberty. Maybe it's just all the Neon. A little more time to program some anti-aliasing would have been good, but that's a very tiny complaint.

There are more things, but I'm kinda burned out.. I guess I'll edit later or something.

[Richg67]

First of all I'd like to mention - as we all know - Grand Theft Auto: Vice City is the end all beat all best game out there to date. It's got more than we ever expected to get from a top dollar game designer. They (Rockstar) simply deliver the 'goods'. They know what we want ('cause we tell 'em) and they deliver ('cause they listen). There are some flaws in the game...we all know this. Bugs and such don't make game play so bad that we just can't play (like many PC games) so I won't go there as not much can be done about it in a console game....but for FUTURE reference....

I just wanna mention some things I think would enhance the game further.

The ability to heal while hiding/resting (standing still for a period of time without conflict) albeit slowly like one point per hour. Another thing is bleeding. Get shot...lose health slowly depending on how bad until you patch it up...somehow.

The ability to have hookers do you on the spot WITH the risk of being busted by police.

The ability to swim (if ONLY) should be considered.

The ability to steal cars when parked shouldn't be so easy. I know the game is designed for fun but wouldn't it be fun to hotwire or have the gadjets to unlock/unalarm said car? Also, when carjacking perhaps the occasional individual would have the car locked...you break the window...force entry...thereby adding some random risk factors.

The ability to lose the police by simply changing cars would be nice. Sound too easy? Well add the speed limit law and that should balance things out. I mean....I can fix the car and change the paint and they don't recognize me but I change cars totally and they spot me?...is it because I've left the scene while the car's being done that they've forgotten about me? Is it because that's the way it's been since GTA 1 that we need to keep tradition? Consider this...A CERTAIN cop knows your face...THAT cop could spot you on a bike or convertible if you changed cars otherwise a cop uninformed would not (depending on how many stars you have). Now I know cops communicate so they would be looking for your clothes, your car but lastly your description. With that in mind there shouldn't be cops ready to ram you just because of the car you're driving (heck they should ram ALL cars that look like yours if that were the case) so the police need to adopt a sort of awareness that's more realistic. NOW....here's where it get's interesting. Beauty Salon = change of description (if only temporary (Simple mustache, etc....but at a cost). OR the ability to wear a mask so as not to be recognized in the first place (Run from the scene and get to safehouse and lose clothes and the stars that mark you). Cops should be on the look-out after a mission as well. If develepers need the chase to be off after the mission then make cut-scene to model that. In the mission where Tommy shoots up the mall it's like all of a sudden (when he's done) they don't know him...I mean WTF!?!

So now....here you are done with the mission and have a change of clothes and a different car...you're thinking everything's just peachy when (against all odds) a cop spots you by your appearance and the chase is on again.....I think it could work.

[Richg67]

Originally posted by Spank-A-Thon
My biggest criticism has to be with the graphics. While I realise there is a lot going on, the draw-distance is pathetic. There has been no visible improvement over GTA3.


That's because there has been no improvment of PS2 graphics engine.

[Richg67]

Originally posted by Spank-A-Thon
Similarly, I find the jerkiness and blur effects when turning (be that driving or in first person mode) to be very off-putting. If it can scroll smoothly when moving forwards, why not when turning?

The blur (trails) effect can be turned off.

[Richg67]

Originally posted by jdkgts
I just didn't like GTA3. It got old too fast for me. Hopefully with VC it won't be this way. I amy rent it first to be sure.

If you didn't like GTA 3 then you won't like this game either PERIOD

[Richg67]

Originally posted by goodman
Even though the sales of the game no doubt are astounding, i expect Rockstar will be listening closely, and work hard to make their next GTA the best experience it can be. People will wait some next time before buying another one to make sure its a big leap over this one....

AGREED

See....THAT'S the thing...ROCKSTAR wants to make a better game based on what the people want. It is better to say what you want than to cry about what is. ;)

If this 'GTA 4' thing is a reality it would be nice to see a 're-vamped' engine with more realism with Mafia's ablity to sense certain driving violations mixed in with Hitman's ablity to sense a persons face after a period of time.

[MakgSnake]

Originally posted by Richg67
That's because there has been no improvment of PS2 graphics engine.
What are you talking? :peoples:

[Infernus]

Hey BlackThornn, you said a lot of things I thought about after I posted (and some I did during posting, but I don't want to seem like I am bashing the game because I wouldn't be playing it if I thought it sucked!). The presence of the cops is WAY TOO HIGH and I was very dissapointed that the main storyline isn't longer and maybe a bit more involved.

The concept of spending time just being "the boss" is a good concept, but I can't do anymore now that I have the Estate than I could when I didn't. So what is that about? Blah.

But yes, I will be pretty pissed if it gets passed over!

Speaking of glitches and bugs (I forget who it was brought that up, sorry!) 2 guys tried to steal a car from me today... one got in on my passenger side before I could take off and I lost control of the car! :shock: It just started driving around, I couldn't steer and the brakes were non-effective but I could give it more gas and change the radio station. LOL I finally caused him to ram into a wall and it then allowed me to exit. (Yes, I tried triangle while in the car before that, it did not work) That's a serious glitch. I almost lost 10k from my asset properties and some robberies. I would have been seriously mad!:mad: :mad: :frust:

[furry_spatula]

I totally agree with that one fella. This game was just slopped together. They completely didnt debug it, I mean.. you sprint, and just start losing armor or health, like 3 points of it, and you jump out of a car or a helicopter going 60mph and it only does 7.. what the hell is up with that?? that pisses me off so much, that I just pick up a health and an armor, all refreshed and fully restored, and I turn around and walk down some steps and lose like 5 points of it, I mean WTF?!?!?!:mad: :frust:

[furry_spatula]

And another thing, sure VC has a lot more bells and whistles than GTA3, but all in all, I think GTA3 was a MUCH better game. It was put together more solidly, and it was just, a lot more firm, and well thought-out. And I also liked the idea of the character being "me" than actually the character being involved in a story and having a name. It takes away from some of the suspense.

VC is just GTA3, half-assed upgraded, in my opinion

[Richg67]

Originally posted by MakgSnake

What are you talking? :peoples:

What I mean is that GTA 3 and GTA VC are both made for the PS2. How COULD the graphics be better?

There ARE however, better things with the graphics that exsist.

[furry_spatula]

Originally posted by Richg67


What I mean is that GTA 3 and GTA VC are both made for the PS2. How COULD the graphics be better?

There ARE however, better things with the graphics that exsist.

graphics engines dude, what they build the game with, it COULD be better. But its the same thing as GTA 3, they could of used like.. I dont know, the MGS engine or Silent Hill engine for it, but they didnt. I guess there's too much shit going on for it to be that good. But the graphics COULD of been way better. They are improved, somewhat.. but not much. And what makes buildings and cars and so forth get all liney and striped and stuff if you look at them from atop a building thru a sniper rifle. It gets all shitty looking.

PS: I hate unique jumps :laugh:

[Richg67]

Well, I think they are doing that with GTA 4

[twiztidfreak69er]

We need to send a letter to R* and tell them to make a new GTA with a MGS type engine or better even lol

[dan da man]

hmm i dont think they will do that but its a good idea but the graphics for gta 3 and vc were fine just a few bits to improve:laugh:

[mark0™]

i think rockstar where on drugs when they did the lighting effects! you ever drived during dawn/dusk and you get the sum in your eyes! the whole screen goes white! you cannot drive like it its caused me to fail a few missions at time, also the stupid neons along the hotel strip are to much, youu cant see at night for all the pinks and purples that flood the screen, does anyone else feel the lights are too much?

also i think GTA4 should concentrate a bit more on being inside the building, it was good that you could rob shops n get in some buildings like the mansion and such but GTA4 should have no limits, access to every place (if it isnt locked)
and features such as robbing homes and burgularising (sp?) buildings, instead of basing it on the streets.

[dan da man]

^
^
yea that would be good, the lighting affects with sun shining u cant see where your going and its like looking at the real sun!:laugh:

[Richg67]

MarkO:
Ever drive a car with glare in your eyes before?
It looks just like that. It's realism.

However, some of the lights are a bit much. I don't think I've ever seen a stop light quite like those in GTA-VC.

They were most likely on drugs during development. When I do drugs the lights look fine but when sober....well....just take some drugs and all will be well.

[mark0™]

i know it is really realistic and all, but is it possible they made it too real, if it didnt totally blind me it would be appreciated by me, also, whats these stats things here on the side?? when did they get put on??

[furry_spatula]

Originally posted by mark0

i know it is really realistic and all, but is it possible they made it too real, if it didnt totally blind me it would be appreciated by me, also, whats these stats things here on the side?? when did they get put on??

man I COMPLETELY agree with you. I mean, I'm all for realism and everything, but jesus h. christ, its a GAME, it isnt real life. its meant for fun and a time waster, not.. your everyday routine. its good that they put that realistic glare in. but good god its TOO much, its a game, they could of done less of it. it really annoys me and takes away from the game I think. they could of had glare, but not that extreme. maybe more like whats on every other game with sun glare, just some.. bubbly looking things, not eyeball cancer. jeez:shock:

[mark0™]

it might even be harmful to people with eppilipsy... I dont think they warned eppiliptics on the cover/manual...

[furry_spatula]

very good point my friend. very good point indeed. realism is good to a point. but dont go overboard with it eh? maybe rockstar will look over our forums and try to take the best and worst, and expand on it for the next edition.

[mark0™]

I think Rockstar (and any other companies involved in computer gmaes) could learn a great deal from the forums, its basically a market research to them here, apart from the random dribble lol.

[sk8er_kyle]

I agree that the sun glare in vc sucks. But even with vc problems I still chose it over gta3. gta3 was good but it was nothing compared to vc. GTA3 had way more flaws then vc. No game can be perfect but vc is better than gta3.:ghost:

[furry_spatula]

its all opinions my friend. I think GTA3 compared to VC as a whole, GTA3 wins by a long shot. but if you're going to nit-pick, then VC would take the trophy.

[mark0™]

hey, i love GTA VC, my favourite game, its just the glare, of course it tops GTA3, when you think back of GTA3 and how "advanced it was" at that time, then you get VC, you can only wonder what the next in line has to offer.... sigh.

[furry_spatula]

this may be off the topic, but instead of starting a new thread.. do ya'll know if the Codebreaker is compatible with Gameshark hexadecimal coding? in other words, can I use Gameshark code lines with the Codebreaker?

thanks

[mark0™]

Originally posted by mark0

hey, i love GTA VC, my favourite game, its just the glare, of course it tops GTA3, when you think back of GTA3 and how "advanced it was" at that time, then you get VC, you can only wonder what the next in line has to offer.... sigh.

start a new thread on it, you'll get better results.

[Beretta55]

i argee with spank on this one. VC is a good game but i perfer GTA3. just the dark gloomy,rundown city really draw's me in. plus i liked the nameless and talkless thug thing they had going. i can call the thug me pretty much since he is nameless:laugh:

[furry_spatula]

Originally posted by beretta55

i argee with spank on this one. VC is a good game but i perfer GTA3. just the dark gloomy,rundown city really draw's me in. plus i liked the nameless and talkless thug thing they had going. i can call the thug me pretty much since he is nameless:laugh:

I completely agree with that "me" thing. its good being God isnt it?

[Beretta55]

yes it is:laugh: it would be even cooler if the guy in GTA3 said "say hello to my little friend!!!" and then whip's out a shotgun....ahhhhh but i can dream:laugh:

[furry_spatula]

It'd be neat, if you could sprint with any weapon :mad: or or.. like dub over your own voice, and make your guy say whatever you want. Like, record your voice saying "time for ol' painless" when you start firing the minigun. :laugh: :laugh: that movie was awesome.

[Darkness 4 Hire]

Serious Flaw is LANCE! Period end of story!

[Beretta55]

Originally posted by Darkness 4 Hire

Serious Flaw is LANCE! Period end of story!
rightttttttttt.....and would it hurt if i asked why?

[dan da man]

gta 3 u was a ganster working for mafia etc in vc u r like bloody james bond!:laugh: the some of the mssions in vc r like ganster mission but some r like james bond and terminator its like action man and hero not enuf gangster playing if u know what i mean!

[mark0™]

you got it the wrong way around, your a total gangster in VC

a. You work opriginally for the Liberty City Mafia
b. You "intimitate" buisnesses
c. You extort buisnesses
d. You take over the town gangster style

[furry_spatula]

I see where you're pointing. but I like in GTA3 how you're that lone man. That has nobody. Keeps to himself, and does what it takes to make some money. you dont need anyone, you do what you have to do, nomatter what. I like the GTA3 characters style. Tommy Vercetti in VC is just too gung-ho. I like that.. laid-back quiet, ass kicking type. or something like that. I wonder whats for dinner

[Infernus]

I've been watching the thread and wondering why no one has hit on the fact that the maneuverability is still ATROCIOUS, and even though the targeting is better, it still sucks.

?

How is Lance a flaw? (besides the fact that he is a backstabbing, mentally impaired psycho) .:P

[mark0™]

damn, i just did all missions and goit the hunter, when my game craches and i didnt save the game

*bangs head on desk*

anyone else get freezes/crashes, the movement went off in mines but sound/radio still ran... grrrr:frust:

[sk8er_kyle]

Mine Freezes when Im at the beginning loading screen. It hasnt been doing it recently though.:ghost:

[Richg67]

I've seen it freeze on other peoples systems but not mine.
SAVE you dolt!
Also keep discs clean and seems to me PS2 does better standing up. Stays cool that way.

[dan da man]

mine has freezed once when i got in the police maveric but never since alway save your game after a mission!

[furry_spatula]

I think its just the game. None of my other PS2 games freeze. VC is just hella buggy. Thats a major factor when choosing GTA3 over VC. I never ONCE had GTA3 freeze or crash on me.

[Richg67]

Originally posted by furry_spatula

VC is just hella buggy.

You have a point there.

Originally posted by furry_spatula

That's a major factor when choosing GTA 3 over VC.

Who's choosing? I think we all have both.

[dan da man]

your right gta 3 never crashed on me maybe vc has just packed to much stuff in it!

[furry_spatula]

It MAY have too much crap packed in it. But it has mediocre graphics. And it isnt THAT extensive. I think the programmers just got lazy at the end, or were behind or something, and didnt debug it very well. They started something good. but I dont think they finished it up very well. Oh well, I'm already waiting for the next installment. I've pretty much completed and done everything there is to do in VC.

I hate unique jumps.

[dan da man]

^
^
me to until this day lol:laugh: :mad:

[furry_spatula]

grr.. this game frustrates me :mad:

[Richg67]

There are other games.
Dead to Rights has me away from GTA VC.