SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Nov 18 2009 09:10 pm

i think he is just talking in general. you are rather OCD in terms of using up mission attempts

Joined: Oct 01 2009 Posts: 5316

username wrote:

i think he is just talking in general. you are rather OCD in terms of using up mission attempts

I won't deny that. I wish I wasn't...but that's just how I roll. You should see my games, 100% perfection...or nothing.

Posted: Nov 18 2009 10:01 pm

1. GTA SA/3 - I couldn't decide, two awesome games.
2. GTA IV- Took away all the cool customizations that made me feel naked. (Great story)
3.GTA VC, 1st true M-rated game, had the original with the "racist" dialogue.
4. GTA II- Best one for PS1.

Joined: May 22 2009 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 353

username wrote:

i think he is just talking in general. you are rather OCD in terms of using up mission attempts

I was always OCD when it came to GTA games. If I failed a mission, I had to reset the game. I remember playing GTA III and Vice City when I was a kid, and I was not satified untill I achieved 100% without getting killed, arrested, failing a mission.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 01:03 am

the only thing i was OCD about in the GTA games, was trying to get 100 taxi missions in a row right from the start. idk why, but i needed to start every game and do 100 taxi missions in a row. probably mostly to learn the map.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 01:10 am

Seems like 100 taxi missions would suck up a lot of time that you could use to bang hookers and them kill them.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 01:44 am

I had the most fun with San Andreas.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 07:40 am

[quote="phantasmzombie"]

username wrote:

I was always OCD when it came to GTA games. If I failed a mission, I had to reset the game. I remember playing GTA III and Vice City when I was a kid, and I was not satified untill I achieved 100% without getting killed, arrested, failing a mission.

See, I find that pretty fucked up. 100% completion is 100% completion. Nobody cares or will give you any additional credit for having done it "perfectly". It just adds needless tedium and completely sucks the fun out of a great game, so stop it.

And yeah, I was talking about how you play SA Dodds. You have such stringent, masochistic self-imposed goals, then complain about how unfair the game is when it counts falling off your bike as a mission attempt. You'd have a lot more fun playing the game if you didn't care about such dumb things.

Joined: Oct 01 2009 Posts: 5316

Pandajuice wrote:

And yeah, I was talking about how you play SA Dodds. You have such stringent, masochistic self-imposed goals, then complain about how unfair the game is when it counts falling off your bike as a mission attempt. You'd have a lot more fun playing the game if you didn't care about such dumb things.

It wasn't even a problem until San Andreas. I don't even know why they did what they did, it just looks ridiculous on your stats. Either they screwed up when programming it, or they decided to be dicks about it. Again, I never had any of these problems in either Vice City or III, which is why I consider them the better games.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 11:51 am

[quote="Pandajuice"]

phantasmzombie wrote:

username wrote:

I was always OCD when it came to GTA games. If I failed a mission, I had to reset the game. I remember playing GTA III and Vice City when I was a kid, and I was not satified untill I achieved 100% without getting killed, arrested, failing a mission.

See, I find that pretty fucked up. 100% completion is 100% completion. Nobody cares or will give you any additional credit for having done it "perfectly". It just adds needless tedium and completely sucks the fun out of a great game, so stop it.

And yeah, I was talking about how you play SA Dodds. You have such stringent, masochistic self-imposed goals, then complain about how unfair the game is when it counts falling off your bike as a mission attempt. You'd have a lot more fun playing the game if you didn't care about such dumb things.

The real point is, just because the screen says you didn't die or fail a mission, doesn't mean you didn't. You aren't actually beating the game with zero deaths or zero fails, you are just fabricating the fact by resetting the game to erase a bad stretch...kinda like using an emulator save state in my opinion.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 11:54 am

is there any reward (besides pride) in getting 100% on everything w/out dying or failing?

Joined: Oct 01 2009 Posts: 5316

No it's not Rydog

How is it like using a save state? You can usually save at any point on there, I'm using the system that the game set up for me. I still have to get back to the mission point and do everything again. Why should I swtich the way I played the games, just because Rockstar fucked up? I'm not fabricating anything by resetting, if I die...I don't want to lose all my weapons, usually failing a mission also doesn't deplete the wanted stars you might've attained, so why the fuck would I play through? If I fail a mission that requires me to kill fifty people or so, I have to go back and collect ammo and all that nonsense again, it's much easier to just reset it. I'm not exploiting anything, if they didn't want me to reload the game, then they should have an autosave after each failed or completed mission.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 12:07 pm

phantasmzombie wrote:

I was always OCD when it came to GTA games. If I failed a mission, I had to reset the game. I remember playing GTA III and Vice City when I was a kid, and I was not satified untill I achieved 100% without getting killed, arrested, failing a mission.

Agreed dodd.

If you check my post you will see I quoted this, I was making my point based on this statement.

Joined: Sep 18 2009 Posts: 132

Doddsino wrote:

Eddie_Hyde wrote:

Hint with the turf wars: They deactivate if you starts and quickly end a vehicle mission, get food, or save.

That's the thing

I try not to waste mission attempts, not exploit any thing of that magnitude. Plus, it still counts on your stats...which really is a peeve of mine.

So you'd rather exploit it by restarting your game or re-loading? Sounds like you can't play to have fun.

Joined: Sep 18 2009 Posts: 132

phantasmzombie wrote:

username wrote:

i think he is just talking in general. you are rather OCD in terms of using up mission attempts

I was always OCD when it came to GTA games. If I failed a mission, I had to reset the game. I remember playing GTA III and Vice City when I was a kid, and I was not satified untill I achieved 100% without getting killed, arrested, failing a mission.

You guys are nuts. You do realize that you still were killed, arrested, and failed... right? Congratulations, you tricked the game into thinking you weren't, and maybe you fooled your friends too. Laughing

lol.

Personally, I like SA and VC equally and most. SA was just so fucking huge with so many things to do. Yeah, there were some annoyances, but I thought that everything else made up for those. I mean, how do you put a jet pack in the game, then take it away in its sequel?! No airplanes? Yeah, IV looked fantastic and it was super realistic, but I'd rather have a game that's more fun with better distractions. III has to win points for being the first GTA that would be recognizable by a young person familiar with GTA IV or SA today. I remember jizzing my pants playing that when it first came out. Then Vice City came out and it improved on basically everything. Same with SA after that. They kept getting bigger and better, in my opinion. So perhaps the bar was set too high for IV to ever meet, but I still feel that it failed in providing basic features that should now be standard in a GTA game.

EDIT: I'm sure someone will have fun pointing out that GTA IV is not a "sequel" but simply a game that came out after SA.

Joined: Oct 01 2009 Posts: 5316

jerknut wrote:

You guys are nuts. You do realize that you still were killed, arrested, and failed... right? Congratulations, you tricked the game into thinking you weren't, and maybe you fooled your friends too. Laughing

lol.

I play for my own satisfaction. I'm fully aware that I die/fail...whatever. I don't feel like dealing with all the unnecessary crap that it entails, so I reset. No harm done. And way to double post..."lol"

Joined: Sep 18 2009 Posts: 132

Doddsino wrote:

jerknut wrote:

You guys are nuts. You do realize that you still were killed, arrested, and failed... right? Congratulations, you tricked the game into thinking you weren't, and maybe you fooled your friends too. Laughing

lol.

I play for my own satisfaction. I'm fully aware that I die/fail...whatever. I don't feel like dealing with all the unnecessary crap that it entails, so I reset. No harm done. And way to double post..."lol"

Well to be fair, I quoted 2 different people and made slightly different points... but I'm sure you can see that. Wink

Its still ridiculous and makes no logical sense to me why resetting or reloading is better than "dealing with all the unnecessary crap". Like what? Waiting 5 seconds while you regenerate to the nearest hospital or police station? I'm just going to chalk it up to just not understanding it.

Joined: Oct 01 2009 Posts: 5316

Maybe it's the fact that I lose all my fucking weapons when I die? The spaz shotgun in San Andreas only spawns in one place, and in order to get a necessary amount of ammo for that would take quite a long time, even if I kept switching weapons out. It's not plausible to just "fucking deal with it" if you're far into the game and have to deal with a lot of stuff. But if you'd rather just constantly have to stop and rearm yourself and whatnot...be my guest. I'll play the game the way I see fit.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 02:27 pm

[quote="jerknut"]

phantasmzombie wrote:

Personally, I like SA and VC equally and most. SA was just so fucking huge with so many things to do. Yeah, there were some annoyances, but I thought that everything else made up for those. I mean, how do you put a jet pack in the game, then take it away in its sequel?! No airplanes? Yeah, IV looked fantastic and it was super realistic, but I'd rather have a game that's more fun with better distractions.

So perhaps the bar was set too high for IV to ever meet, but I still feel that it failed in providing basic features that should now be standard in a GTA game.

Agree completely. Some of the most fun I had in SA was with the airplanes/jetpack/Predator helicopter/fighter jet. Flight in IV seems like an afterthought.....all you get is a plain helicopter, and I don't think there's much you can do with it. And how great would it be to fly around Liberty City with a jetpack? They really dropped the ball by leaving those things out, IMO.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 06:31 pm

I think IV is the best. But SA is my favorite. But personally, I prefer Saint's Row to GTA now. SR has taken the path that GTA: SA was going. IV is an amazing game, but personally, I prefer the deep customization, endless side missions and activities, insane amount of transportation, amount of crazy weapons. GTA IV took a step back in that department. But at least they did it for the right reasons. I just happen to prefer the zaniness of Saints Row to the new direction of Grand Theft Auto.

But as far as what game is best, I think they progressively get better. I could accept the argument that San Andreas is better than IV because it is kind of hard to compare the two. But looking at the last generation GTA games, I can more easily start with GTA III and play forward. If I start with San Andreas and play back, I find it really hard to do.For example, in GTA III, you die in water, you can't bail out of a moving car, etc. A lot of advancements made in the series that I am used to aren't there. On top of that, the maps get larger, the choice in weapons increases, the amount of transportation, as well as the variety, increases with each game.

I would also add that I like the stories and the settings well enough in each game that I don't mind overlooking them and focusing on the game play, extra features, and improvements in the games to determine which is the best.

So my list, if it wasn't obvious, looks like this:

1. GTA IV
2. San Andreas
3. Vice City
4. GTA III
5. GTA II
6. GTA I
7. GTA Advance (I just had a hard time enjoying it.

I haven't played Liberty City Stories, Vice City Stories, or China Town Wars.

Also, like i said, I like the Saints Row franchise better.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 06:34 pm

[quote="Ice2SeeYou"]

jerknut wrote:

phantasmzombie wrote:

Personally, I like SA and VC equally and most. SA was just so fucking huge with so many things to do. Yeah, there were some annoyances, but I thought that everything else made up for those. I mean, how do you put a jet pack in the game, then take it away in its sequel?! No airplanes? Yeah, IV looked fantastic and it was super realistic, but I'd rather have a game that's more fun with better distractions.

So perhaps the bar was set too high for IV to ever meet, but I still feel that it failed in providing basic features that should now be standard in a GTA game.

Agree completely. Some of the most fun I had in SA was with the airplanes/jetpack/Predator helicopter/fighter jet. Flight in IV seems like an afterthought.....all you get is a plain helicopter, and I don't think there's much you can do with it. And how great would it be to fly around Liberty City with a jetpack? They really dropped the ball by leaving those things out, IMO.

I agree, I wish they would have included more, but I understand why they used thier resources the way they did. I am glad that you now have a parachute in the Ballad of Gay Tony.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 07:13 pm

1. San Andreas
2. III
3. Vice City
4. Vice City Stories
5. Liberty City Stories

San Andreas might be the greatest game I have ever played. I've logged so many hours on that Goddamn game it's retarded. And it never ever gets old. I'm still coming up with new ways to entertain myself, and I've had the game for like 5 years. I actually can't believe it's been out that long. I loved III, it was the first M-rater I ever played. I loved the feel of Vice City, but I never got too in-depth with it, I'm not sure why. I've played IV only a little, but I plan on buying it when I get a 360 on Boxing Day.

Oh, and I cheat. All the time.

Posted: Nov 19 2009 07:47 pm

Fuckin A...this thread is making me want to play GTA, anybody have a PS2 for sale?

Posted: Nov 19 2009 09:32 pm

Rydog wrote:

Fuckin A...this thread is making me want to play GTA, anybody have a PS2 for sale?

Play it on the PC.

1,2,3,LC,SA, & IV are all available for it.

Better Graphics.

Better Controls. (Once you use mouse aim, you'll never go back.)

And, the older ones have crap for requirements.

Here's SA's: (Which means if you can play it, you can play anything under it easily.)
Intel Pentuim 4 or AMD XP Processor (or better)
384MB RAM
16x Speed DVD Drive
4.7GB Hard Drive Space
128MB Video Card
DirectX 9 compatible sound & video drivers

Posted: Nov 19 2009 10:14 pm

San Andreas was always my favorite. The sheer size of the area of the game and how much you can do simply blows my mind (it opened up so many possibilities just by giving you the ability to climb). Vice City would have to be a close second. I was never particularly impressed by GTA III or IV, and the first two games just blow chunks.