Grand Theft Auto Grieving Thread - Yep, I've been drinkin' again...

[William Murderface]

Where you using in-game cheats. Im sure that fucks up your collectibles/100% rating and was the case in vice city.

No. I was playing the game straight, no cheats at all.

 

[William Murderface]

Am I the only one who hasn't used the garages in GTA V? Is it different from single player to Online?

I know with how garages work with the 3D era, you can manipulate it by storing special cars with special properties. Anything you store in there will respawn, even if you store a wreck. Brand new car.

That was one of my gripes about GTAV. Only Trevor has multiple save locations (his trailer and Cousin Floyd's apartment or the Vanilla Unicorn) and there is only the attached garage to the save locations and the offsite garage you can buy to store vehicles in. Franklin does have the ability to still save cars at his first house after his aunt tosses him out though. But if you decide to go from Los Santos to the desert or the mountains as Franklin or Michael you can't buy a safehouse and can only Quick Save. Every other GTA game you could buy multiple locations as safehouses though.

 

[The Last Stand]

That was one of my gripes about GTAV. Only Trevor has multiple save locations (his trailer and Cousin Floyd's apartment or the Vanilla Unicorn) and there is only the attached garage to the save locations and the offsite garage you can buy to store vehicles in. Franklin does have the ability to still save cars at his first house after his aunt tosses him out though. But if you decide to go from Los Santos to the desert or the mountains as Franklin or Michael you can't buy a safehouse and can only Quick Save. Every other GTA game you could buy multiple locations as safehouses though.

I recall GTA V being the only GTA where each character has their own personal vehicle.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

I recall GTA V being the only GTA where each character has their own personal vehicle.

Yes, each one had a personal vehicle that they always had no matter what (though Michael lost access to his for a good chunk of the story due to his son stealing it, and was forced to use a temporary replacement, and Franklin also had an additional motorcycle). But if you wanted other cars, your options were limited; each character had an attached garage to their house, but it only stored two cars at most (Trevor's could only store one comfortably if I remember correctly), and just those two cars; tried to squeeze in a bike or something and it probably wouldn't work. All three could also buy an additional garage, but those garages only held four cars/motorcycles. Trevor alone had additional space in his second dwelling; first was Lloyd's apartment, which gave one additional space, then, when that was lost, it was strip club parking spaces around back, but I can't remember how many spaces were guaranteed to allow Trevor to store his vehicle. Any car you left or abandoned would be kept in the police impound lot for a few days, giving you a chance to recover it; the personal vehicles would just always be available somewhere. But as you can see, the number of cars you could own was ludicrously limited. In comparison, in online mode, you could buy massive multicar garages with multiple levels. This could have easily been ported to the single player game, but Rockstar made a point of not updating single player after a certain point.

edit: added missing word

 

[The Last Stand]

But as you can see, the number of cars you could own was ludicrously limited. In comparison, in online mode, you could buy massive multicar garages with multiple levels. This could have easily been ported to the single player game, but Rockstar made a point of updating single player after a certain point.

Only reason to buy cars in the single player would be for the Kifflom! sidequest.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

Only reason to buy cars in the single player would be for the Kifflom! sidequest.

It be nice to own various cars, upgrade them at your leisure, just to drive around with. But Rockstar went out of their way to make this impossible and never corrected it.

 

[xXx: State of the Union]

maybe I'm just full of shit and its an urban legend. Like the nude tomb raider cheat.

I'm positive this is an urban legend. The only cheats that I think fucked up the games were the Ped AI cheats (the riot cheats) because they stayed on if you saved with them on.

I recall GTA V being the only GTA where each character has their own personal vehicle.

Johnny had his personal Hexer in The Lost and Damned.

 

[The Last Stand]

I'm tempted to buy a copy of GTA V to mop up those editor achievements. However, I already have a backlog of games and I'm burned out of GTA V.

 

[The Last Stand]

Okay, I decided to revisit The Ballad of Gay Tony expansion. It depicts gay people more humanly than modern pop culture today. Its story does feel like it's going fast forward with a rushed ending. Even The Lost and Damned had a better ending in my opinion.

I also forgot how clunky IV's melee combat is. Countering is spamming A and hope that the animation triggers.

 

[The handsome tard]

Sometimes I wonder why GTA 5's writers seemed to have a hate boner for GTA 4's characters. A few of them remained okay but most of the returning ones are in a worse spot than they were before (if not outright killed) or at best havent develop much since. Johnny is the biggest example, with many saying that they could have replaced him with some random biker character and it didnt have to be the lead of Lost and Damned. You could even have The Lost but make them a chapter that splitered away from Johnny and this is why they are so different and weak. They made it Johnny either to make Trevor seem tougher (which is highly artificial and unnecessary) or because its a stab towards the Lost and The Damned DLC (which is just spiteful). And good luck trying to wield the canon between the DLC and GTA 5's events as it eventually falls into the "it just happened".

I did want to see Nico in GTA 5 once upon a time when the game just came out but nowadays Im just glad that they settled on him going quiet and thats it. And GTA 6 better keep it that way.

That isnt to say I want to see Trevor getting killed in a similar fashion in GTA 6, more bad writing doesnt do undo bad writing. We all can agree that if you are going to kill an once playable character, which is preferable you dont at all but still, you need to make sure it is something they couldnt have avoided even with all of their skills (which CAN be hard to write in a convincing fashion). Look at Vic Vance from Vice City Stories, when he dies in VC's opening, you could make the argument that the in between years softened him up a bit and that there was no way he could have fought back at the position he while (grabbing the suitcases). It keeps his unceremous death grounded but not cheap as that sadly can happen in the world of crime, sometimes your luck just runs out at the worst possible moment (lets face it, Tommy escaping with his life was pure luck on his end).

So if you are going to kill off previous protagonists, make sure its not out of some unjustified hateboner or to artificially make the new comer look tough.

 

[The Last Stand]

I did want to see Nico in GTA 5 once upon a time when the game just came out but nowadays Im just glad that they settled on him going quiet and thats it. And GTA 6 better keep it that way.

Quick tangent on this, it's Niko with a K, not a c.

Anyway, I do agree with the writer's decisions to have Niko's story and character arc independent from V outside of a couple character mentions. The choices Niko makes during the plot are ambiguous based on his character and experiences. I would hate it that the choice I made is "non-canon."

Player interpretation for Niko works best.

 

[malapropism]

Its crazy how much of a cottage industry non-tent is for this franchise. Almost hour long reaction videos for 90 seconds of trailer. It makes capeshit grifters seem restrained. I guess its a victim of its own success here, as the type of really stating-the-obvious a vs b comparisons between the games is an easy formula for clicks. Maybe I'm just jealous much more impressive open worlds don't get this level of analysis.

 

[No. 7 cat]

Here's something that pisses me off to this day: the car save system from GTA V. It was awful. It didn't work. In San Andreas, you had this ability to save a car in a garage by just driving it in, and then it would basically keep respawning that car unless you did something. Don't remarkably how it would stop, because I know you could sometimes fit multiple cars/motorcycles in a garage, but the big thing is that it was reliable. You could COUNT on the car always spawning in the garage. It was inconvenient to have to stash different cars in different properties, but at the same time, that also served as a motivation to buy them, because San Andreas was also WELL BALANCED in its economy compared to GTA V.

GTA V comes along, and I think it had the same basic idea, except it was totally fucked up and would constantly glitch out removing your cars. And keep in mind, if you were dumb enough to buy a car in the game, you'd be out a ton of money because they insisted on realism in prices and payouts instead of what worked well. What's worse is that Online had this reasonably functional insurance system, where you could pay a much lower price to replace than you do to acquire for the first time. But they didn't bother implementing this in the main game despite it making more sense there.

Moreover, there are other games from BEFORE GTA V's day that got this right. Red Dead Redemption was the first to get it right by just having horse deeds give you infinite respawns of a certain type of horse, but even more relevantly, Mafia had a rule that if you drove a car it was yours forever and you could pick any car from your collection out of your garage.

For being king of the AAA world it is inexcusable that they shit the bed so badly on such a basic feature. Posting this because Mafia II reminded me of it.

RDR2 online was far from perfect, but sadly it seems to be dying or dead. It's a small while since played GTAV but I noticed that whenever I tried use that vaguely Russian sub, it always spawned in an empty lobby. I just want to fire missiles on San Andreas or whatever it's called, and maybe take out those jet motorbike or whatever homos. Maybe I've lost interest, and honestly would need to rain money again to some of the new things, some of which like that flying scooter thing, seem stupid. It really is about microtransactions and Shark cards now. GTA:SA is still good for me, alto it's also some time since I played. Burglary, gang territories, oldest profession hiring (maybe the hot coffee thing can be reactivated, but it's old after one go), and a good story.

 

[The Last Stand]

GTA: TBoGT is on sale on XBL as of this post for a tenner. I have replayed and completed the story, along with 100%'ing all storyline missions for their secondary objectives.

I had the impression that GTA IV was easier than expected upon replaying it. Granted, I'm still within the beginning in Hove Beach. The Ballad of Gay Tony is another matter, even if you're not going for 100%. Accuracy, time limit, headshots, mission specific objectives can vary. Luckily, you do not have to do the secondary objectives in one go. You can replay missions after beating the story through your phone.

Five missions in particular were difficult to 100%, three of which involves flying. Example: Sexy Time involving Yusuf and using a Buzzard to destroy a yacht and three fleeing boats. There's no lock-on for the missiles. You'd have to fly low to hit what you're aiming at. If you're not good at flying/shooting, good luck. You'd better learn the nuances with helicopter combat. The time frame is tight with six minutes. Again, if you're not good at flying, that can cost you.

 

[The handsome tard]

Looking back on GTA 4 and 5 in relation to the rest of the series, I kind had a realization.

GTA 4 is a better game than 5...but 5 is a better GTA game.

Spoiler: Got a bit autistically long, my bad

Let me explain. Both games have their pros and cons but we are looking through a lens of what came before, the 3D era. While the 3D entries have never reached the satirical heights of the latter Saints Row games, they still had a mostly self aware energy to them but not distractingly so, allowing you to still be invested. We all played them so we all here know what Im talking about. Now as for GTA4, it was a pretty experimental entry, almost like Rockstar was trying to mature the franchise towards something, while still has a satirical side, took itself significantly more seriously, right down to moments of legit tragedy like with both endings being bittersweet at best (Niko gets revenge but the one he loved is still dead and now he has to just carry on). Niko wasnt anything like any previous GTA lead even, since most of them tended to either be average joes thrusted into the crime world for reasons out of their control or already a part of said world, Niko stood out for being different, he wasnt even american but a hardened east europe foreigner on a mission. Most quest givers tended to be less satirical too, a lot of times coming off as realistically cold, threatening and sociopathic. Liberty City is mostly devoided of colour and seemed a step backwards in terms of map variety compared to San Andreas. The physics also tended to be more realistic and the game almost seemed to motivate you to not play it like you did the 3D trilogy, especially in terms of driving, usually by hav- *cue Niko flying out the windshield screaming* THAT happening a lot. The shooting also motivated you taking cover far more frequently and aiming shoots more accurately, with people reacting oddly realistically to getting shot, usually holding the entrance wound in pain or at least losing their focus, opening them for more shots.

The closest GTA 4 came to being more like the previous entries was The Ballad of Gay Tony, which took a lighter and satirical tone more akin to GTA San Andreas where it wasnt self parody but the situations could be a bit "quirky".

Either way, GTA 4 had a story you could get behind more but it did seem like a departure from what the series had before and that no doubt bothered many veterans, even those that still enjoyed it none the less. It was clear that Rockstar wanted to try new things after remaining relatively comfortable in the 3D era with 6 games set in that universe. GTA 4 became a topic of discussion on where the franchise should head towards in terms of characters, theme and atmosphere and 5 returning to Los Santos after only one game away from it really feels like Rockstar deciding to do something familiar again.

GTA 5 has a lot of flaws but it does play out a bit more like the 3D entries while keeping most enhacements from 4, right down to its three leads being maybe a reference to the type of protagonists we had before, like the experienced criminal, the newcomer wanting to prove himself and Trevor was probably meant to reference the players that only play GTA for the violence and destruction. GTA 5 is just a very familiar entry and while I dont dislike being familiar, it is to wonder if it maybe doesnt play it too safe. While you can pick to end 5 in a bittersweet fashion like in 4, they dont carry the same punch, each with different reasons but I digress, ultimately you are going to go with Ending C which has been confirmed to be canon by GTA Online. The physics also play more akin to the 3D entries, right down to the windshield launch only happening upon death.

Ultimately GTA 4 has a more grounded and I dare say more objectively good crime story while 5 has a more familiar and satisfying story as a GTA game. And it begs the question if GTA 4 would have been better off as its own game or a spin off rather than a full blown new entry because it really seems like Rockstar isnt returning to its style anytime soon with GTA 6 setting up to be more like 5. Either way, GTA 4 has its place in history as both top and underdog at the same time bizarrely in this franchise.

 

[Prophetic Spirit]

Yeah, you're right @The handsome tard

GTA 5 had basically the bullet time from Max Payne, the berserker mode from Scarface: The World is Yours and the insane reflexes from Midnight Club LA.
Gameplay-wise is a improvement from GTA IV and their specific boat-like handling vehicles.

The only think i dislike from GTA 5 was the change from GTA IV Rockstar bitched about for so long (remember boys, Saint's Row was created by Volition as a answer of how Rockstar tried to drive in the "serious" part in the main plots).

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

Some GTA fans on Reddit are speculating that they may have found an Easter egg — Tommy Vercetti’s mansion — in the GTA VI trailer.

 

[Prophetic Spirit]

View attachment 5671318

Some GTA fans on Reddit are speculating that they may have found an Easter egg — Tommy Vercetti’s mansion — in the GTA VI trailer.

Of course Reddit. Only faggots can do that at launch.

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

Of course Reddit. Only faggots can do that at launch.

It would be nice if I get to see an Easter egg of Ricardo Díaz shooting a shotgun at ongoing traffic while pretending that the car drivers were birds.

 

[The Last Stand]

Looking back on GTA 4 and 5 in relation to the rest of the series, I kind had a realization.

GTA 4 is a better game than 5...but 5 is a better GTA game.

I share similar sentiments about GTA IV and V as GTA games. The short of it is that 3D era GTAs were able to tell serious crime stories and subject matter while having their gameplay loops be centered around arcadey exploration of their worlds. I don't want to say that they weren't meant to be taken SERIOUSLY, rather those games were intended as action centric open world games with an arcade intent.

The Ballad of Gay Tony may as well be a different game from GTA IV & TLaD. The mechanics are the same, but the general tone is night and day from IV. More saturation, no film grain, more upbeat characters, outlandish missions and weaponry, you could tell me that this was a mod and I'd believe you. I enjoyed both experiences but for different reasons.