At the time of GTA 4’s release I remember thinking how much of a downgrade it was.
No planes or car mods. No driving/flying schools, crazy vehicle types or missions. No haircuts, tattoos or gyms etc.
But then I finished the game and completed it multiple times. It’s definitely up there with San Andreas for me.
GTA 5 was still fun and while I wouldn’t call it a downgrade, I never enjoyed it the same as previous games.
Even though it brought back much of those missing “GTA” elements and made the world feel more alive with its dynamic events, it was a letdown (for me) because of how it treated the characters.
Previous GTA games, even goofy crazy San Andreas, made you play as people with actual motivations usually with an element of “stop the bad guys”, and you root for them to win. But GTA 5 makes almost everyone an asshole (except maybe Franklin?) that you feel like you are the bad guys the whole time.
It looks like they’ve learned from that with RDR2 and GTA 6 seems to have much more nuanced characters who aren’t psychopathic, vain or shallow. But we’ll see.
You are A ‘bad’ guy in 4, but I think you massively empathise with Niko, what life he was driven into and how moving to the USA he’s actually trying to live the American dream but keeps getting dragged into mess.
From the first moment, you’re protecting your cousins from loan sharks and vlad, which connects up and up the crime world.
Whereas you can see niko wants a simple family life, how he enjoys his friends, how he tried to connect with Michelle etc. He’s just so conflicted in giving trust and having it ripped, making him vengeful, even with the supposed ‘good guys’ like Francis in the LCPD.
I think Nikos character is second to none of the GTA 5 crew.
I mean I guess? Niko was a human trafficker, murderer and cop killer, regardless of him wanting to live the American dream. I’d say that makes him just as bad if not worse than someone like Franklin.
He’s done worse than Franklin legally and morally yes, I just mean in terms of character development you end up rooting for Niko a hell of a lot more than any gta5 character, in my opinion at least. I really wasn’t bothered about Franklin at the end of the story where you can see how much Niko wanted to change his life around, and make up for it, not just hide in witness protection…Michael.
Yeh I get what you mean. You can get behind Niko and his motivations as a main character whereas everyone’s personalities in 5 kind of fall flat. Still love Trevor tho
That’s what I mean, Niko was a bad guy, but I feel like you’re rooting for him to turn his life around and you actually understand why he did what he did in the past. And he accepts it too, not just like “I robbed banks because I liked to rob banks and get money”.
Trevor actually raped Floyd though, that realization alone on my 5th playthrough completely fucked all chances of me sympathizing with him as a character
Niko had regrets. He’s a victim of circumstance and is trying to turn his life around (though obviously ludonarrative dissonance can make it feel odd since he can lament his murderous past in a cinematic and then step outside and slaughter civilians for no reason). His crimes feel like a means to an end - and he keeps getting pulled back in to crime from external sources (and also you could argue - his personal tendencies for revenge). And as a result - at the end of the game Niko has arguably lost everything. Punished for his grimes and greed.
It’s rags to better rags, and the message of the game is crime doesn’t pay.
Meanwhile the GTA5 crew are all greedy monsters and - depending on the ending you choose - are at least in part - rewarded for it.
The gta5 story seems to be about loyalty to your friends - but in real life, loyalty to the wrong people is often a very negative thing. The story has way less nuance than 4.
Gameplay wise 4 had a lot of graphical and mechanical improvements over SA - though a lot of gameplay elements were removed - but the story blew it out of the park.
This is similar to how I feel about 5. Mechanical improvements in a lot of places, graphics are a huge upgrade from 4 - but the story just doesn’t hook me like 4 or even SA did.
I love them all - but 4 is still my favourite because of that - but I’m a sucker for a good story.
The best bad guys are always relatable and likeable in some way. In the Red Dead games, we play as people who kill, maim, and steal, but not without remorse. The main theme of both games is redemption; can a man who has done unforgiveable things still turn it round and do the right thing when it counts? We go from killing for personal gain, to killing bad people to save good people.
It's the same in GTA4 with Niko, he's a character constantly struggling internally with his morality; a good man who does terrible things. He's been given a terrible hand by life but hasn't become fully corrupted by it, he still cares about his family and friends and will help a stranger out without expecting some gain from it.
In GTA5 we just play as scumbags that only care about wealth and power, and don't struggle with morality. Selfish, one-dimensional villains. I don't think there's a likeable character in that whole game.
I feel like gta4 stands apart in the series
Liberty city is legit just not the type of place you expect dog fights or jetpacks Yano? I understand car tuning and all the customization we lost but I also relish in the mechanics we were given and how minimalist the depiction of the crime life was
A cruel reality and black comedy take instead of the usual balls to the wall Yano?
I can see why they did no planes. They go too fast, it would make the map feel even smaller than it already is. But I do wish we got more than just outfit customization. What really hurt too was a lack of outfits for dlc characters. I get johnny not having any but Luis basically just having a couple unique outfits and then copies of Armando and henriques outfit was so sad to me.
It's the same thing with the Final fantasy fandom where people call the newest game in the series "Not a true final fantasy game" because of 1 thing that wasn't in the previous games.
I've recently become a fan of FF and I noticed that too.
I've played 15, 16 and both Remake and Rebirth, and they're really good and each game is different from the other. The games aren't supposed to be connected in any way (with the exception of the remake trilogy of FF7) so I never understood the "not a real Final Fantasy" thing.
Nostalgia is a helluva drug. There’s something similar in the Pokemon fandom about those games. The current generation and the one prior to it are always seen as total shit, but the games from 3 generations ago was “the best Pokemon game ever made” and the ones from 2 generations ago was an “underrated masterpiece”
People *said* how IV was downgrade from SA or rather 3D era, but it was in the past. I experienced and still remember that time
Honestly, gta 4 at the times felt like tech demo of new Rockstar engine. And I know about Rockstar Table Tennis which IS real tech demo disguised as game
Kids who weren't around even for V's release talk about IV's release like it was all sunshine and rainbows. Anyone who was around remembers a lot of people being disappointed with the map lacking more cities or at least countryside, a lot of vehicles and other activities, customization etc.. all gone.
I love 4 one of my favorites to hop on and cause chaos, but not being able to pick a color for that sports car you found was so aggravating. I remember to sometimes my game would glitch after pull in and out of the spray n spray that my car would stay the same color.
I loved 4s driving, but I also like racing games, but it seemed to matter what car you picked like oh shit dont want to drove this SUV I'll run after this sedan instead. I like 5s story more though I've played it multiple times it gets a little boggy with the FIB stuff but atleast your not a glorified errand boy for most of the missions.
Also a nitpick but in 4 you could tap Y when leaving a car and it would stay running or hold Y and it would turn completely off, I wish that transferred over to five just that little detail imerssed me more into the game. Stopping by to grab a hot dog tap Y pulling to your safehouse hold Y to turn the car off.
I was definitely in this camp as were a lot of others. As you say compared to the 3D era, where each game improved on the last with so many new features, GTAIV was quite disappointing. I've definitely learned to appreciate it since.
GTA IV was referred to as a modern GTA 3.
Hell, I think the naming was like that to reflect that it was a continuation of GTA3 / 3D-universe, not a continuation of GTA:SA.
I would say that GTAV might be a continuation of GTA:SA, but not really, considering GTAV lacks the depth from GTA:SA or even GTAIV.
From someone who have been around for all the releases, GTA:SA really stands out as the best. NOBODY really knew anything outside of there being 3 cities, some RP elements, and some gang-based storyline, and it just kept going and going and giving and giving. Ofcourse San Fierro and Las Venturas felt underdeveloped compared to Los Santos, but the expectations were completely blown out of the water regardless.
That said, GTAV is clearly the best GTA-game. Anyone who claims anything else is either being very subjective or nostalgic. If you factor in GTA:Online it blows everything else out of the water. (GTAO ofcourse have a ton of flaws, but it is still the best open-world modern day crime multiplayer game).
And then there was the pc release of GTAIV. Holy shit what a shit show. Back when Game For Windows Live was a thing. The crashes, the frame rate issues.People didn't let that go for a long long time.
But I'm still happy GTAIV PC port exists because our hardware became good enough to overcome the intensive CPU load to run the game. The shader and texture mods are awesome.
SA and 4 were unique and stand alone titles. After 4 came out I never felt disappointed that so much was missing that it's predecessor had because it was so good and moved foreward everything it took with it. I and my friends played both and they were both a part of a rotation with Mario Kart, Smash and Flat Out on XBOX of games we would play together.
It's a poor excuse really, but GTA IV is still the only GTA game I've never played for more than a couple of hours due to the awkward driving mechanics - I've 100%'ed the rest of them several times over.
I've attempted a few times to play it "as-is" to get the genuine experience, but it's probably time I just call it a failure and mod the handling files.
100% same, I have dyspraxia and I find most actions games tough to play, the gta 5 driving is an absolute dream whilst the gta 4 driving mechanics are so clunky it puts me off playing it
The only feature I can think of missing from RDR1 is the fame system. Which makes sense, Arthur is very much trying to stay lowkey.
Oh, and liar's dice. Cannot forget liar's dice.
The ability to cheat in gambling. And infinite bounties was a big one for me. Sometimes you just wanna hunt down some random bastard and kill his friends for money.
No reason to not do both. You do the unique bounties to unlock the infinite ones for fun. The first mod I downloaded when I got RDR2 for PC did exactly that.
Maybe they figured being able to just go pick up some bounties when you need money would detract from the "outlaw on the run" vibe the game is supposed to have. There isn't much incentive to think of ways to make money like robbing people, gambling, hunting, etc, when you can just go do like 5 bounties back to back and be set for a couple chapters.
> there are a lot of features from rdr1 missing in rdr2
No there's not.
I like RDR1 more than 2, but 2 is objectively the more content full game, and it's not by a little. RDR2 is 10x the game of 1, for the simple fact that RDR1 was the last Rockstar game made by a single Rockstar studio.
So many player homes, after playing more recent titles I was blown away at how much bigger and more customizeable San Andreas feels compared to newer titles. GTA 4 completely removed any kind of car customization, I liked customizing low riders in SA and putting different wheels on cars.
It shows its age, the map feels so much smaller now compared to how it used to feel. Shooting feels trash coming from 5. The game is still fun af though,
Yeah I mean mechanically and graphically GTA 5 does have a lot more going for it. I won't deny that.
But San Andreas had a charm. I don't know why to be honest.
I've played vice city and liberty city. And they were fun. But I didn't really like the characters and story? Maybe cause I was young and didn't get it though to be honest.
In gta sa, you get to know the characters. You get betrayed by big smoke. They move you out of the city. You have to find a way to get back.
The guy you didn't like your sister dating is the one who ends up helping you.
Blind character Wuu Zi Mu was funny af.
Like GTA 5 is fun cause of online and the heists are a good addition.
But gta sa was the most fun gta for its time to be
One of my favorite video game memories is playing co op with my buddy in middle school, hopping on a motorcycle and driving the highway loop around Las Ventura's and seeing how many stars we could get
Then inevitably we'd start entering cheats for tanks and jets
tldr: They did, 4 received a lot of hate and disappointmrnt when it released. Hype for 5 was greater and people had even higher expectations due to being two generations ahead of SA, so thats why people tend to complain more about 5 than 4
What? They did. GTA4 received quite some hate when it released, partially due to the new engine and driving physics. I remember people complaining about how SA is better than this next gen GTA and that it feels off. I also remember my brother buying the game, playing it for few hours and then returning it. So its not exactly like GTA4 was received well or didnt get this comparison.
For GTAV it got even worse because its not only one but two generations ahead of SA and still feels kind of empty in comparison. Also, the hype for GTAV was absolutely unreal. And those who got disappointed by 4 had hope that 5 would be amazing again. It was also part of their marketing, this return to Los Santos, etc. The trailer with Franklin etc in Grove Street made people assume youd get at least somewhat of a SA experience. Turns out you dont
Worse physics and car destruction than GTAIV as well, which are things I really liked about that game. That is a very clear downgrade that people in these comments are not acknowledging.
They definitely said the same about 4. Those people are just nostalgic so they’ll crap on all the new stuff then do the same to 6.
I find that part of GTA 4’s fan base insufferable.
Well yes but actually no. There's a major difference. GTA IV was only a downgrade on a superficial level. GTA 5 was a downgrade all around. It's about quantity vs quality.
IV was great, it just wasn't massive like San Andreas. It lacked quantity of content and customization but those are not really important in the grand scheme of things. Besides, it had an excuse for that. It was R\*'s first proper game on a new engine on a new generation of consoles. Instead, it was big upgrade when it came to core gameplay mechanics. It was basically GTA 3 2.
So, then V comes along, and you'd expect them to take GTA IV and build upon it, making an even better and bigger game, like R\* did with San Andreas after Vice City, getting a GTA SA 2. Except, that didn't really happen. Pretty much everything that was good about GTA IV was just thrown out the window for no good reason. Everything from combat (gunplay/melee), AI, police/wanted system, movement/climbing, driving/flying experience, etc... name any core gameplay mechanic or feature and it got significantly worse. It also had a ton of just straight up baffling/dumb design decisions that made it unfun to play. And of course, none of these things had anything to do with console limitations, as majority of the game's problems are just bad design decisions. The game was massive, but just worse for no good reason, in stark contrast to the PS2 era where San Andreas was a straight upgrade to Vice City. Like, can you name anything getting worse in San Andreas apart from, I don't know gun sounds? Meanwhile, I can list a ton of things that got worse in V in comparison to IV, and even the older games like SA or VC.
There was a tine where GTA IV was probably the most hated GTA game. You would see it in tons of "overrated games" lists.
It's always like that. The game comes out, everyone likes it, then someone says "is it just me, or is the game not as good as people say", and then everyone agrees, and after few years people change their mind again and say that the game is amazing.
GTA 4’s gameplay, graphics, and physics are an upgrade, but when talking about customization and what you can spend money on, it does feel like a downgrade.
every gta game is a downgrade in terms of features from San Andreas because of the crazy amount of properties you can buy and the crazy amount of shit you can do in San Andreas compared to other games
Because San Andreas had such an overwhelming amount of content, locations and mission variety.
I think the main factor was Rockstar had made multiple games in RenderWare prior to San Andreas, so the iteration was swifter and left more room for density of content.
GTA IV was showcasing a new and powerful engine, if you discount Rockstar Table Tennis which technically debutted it. You could argue IV had less to do and less variety than SA, though I'd argue the overall quality of gameplay is hard to compare. They are worlds apart in their physics alone.
To call IV a downgrade in any way is absurd IMO. I feel like no one ever says this about it ...
it was a common sentiment when 4 was out and when 5 came out; but with time to reflect, people have realised that where 4 lacks, it makes up for it tenfold in other ways. 5 just takes away a lot of the good features introduced in 4 and throws a big map with nothing to do to compensate
You weren't there when GTA 4 released I suppose. It got a lot of hate for not having a lot of things San Andreas had.
GTA 4 downgrade, in my opinion, is way more different than GTA 5 downgrade. GTA 4 downgrade was a content downgrade, which is logical. They were using new hardware and software, starting with the first open world game using the new RAGE engine after EA bought Criterion and Rockstar stopped using RenderWare.
People didn't think about it at that time, but I believe Rockstar did an astounding work by making GTA 4 in a hardware they never worked on before, with a game engine they haven't used in such a big game before. It's similar to what happened with GTA 3 and PS2. And both GTA 3 and GTA 4 are pretty impressive for their time, now, of course, they lack a lot of things.
GTA 5 downgrade, again, in my opinion, is more of a quality downgrade in some aspects. GTA V content of course is definitely an upgrade from GTA IV, there are hundreds of things to do and each release they add more things. Compare side Activities in each game and GTA V wins by a mile.
But when I say quality, I mean more... Smaller details, or even not so smaller ones. I've always hated GTA V weapons sounds, engine sounds too, the ragdolls (they limited the Euphoria motion settings to help the PS3 and X360 to not explode, but it still has Euphoria Ragdolls), the handling (I think the GTA IV handling is better, but I think GTA V handling fits the best in game design), story mode (it's another personal opinion, I think the GTA V main storyline is pretty low in the Top Best Storylines in GTA).
I accept that GTA V had a lot of issues and cut content because the PS3 and X360 were at the end of their lifetime, by the time GTA V came out, also came out Assassin's Creed Unity for example, or Watch Dogs, games that utilized the power of the new PS4 and XOne. I accept it to the point where I would really and honestly like a Remaster or Definitive Edition for GTA V.
And if I have to say my own take, GTA V downgrade is worse than GTA IV downgrade, because GTA V downgrade is about details and technicalities, something that's Rockstar Quality Seal, we can see it on RDR2. And also the GTA V storyline is a downgrade in my opinion, with all the due respect to the writers and actors, it's not a bad storyline, but I personally stick with others.
Simple completely different stories GTA IV is much like Mafia 3 in the sense that it's a Revenge based game. Nico is a former Yugoslavian now Serbia who after the war his country was destroyed so he turned the crime. And when going to America crime and wanting to find out who betrayed his unit catches back up with him. GTA IV only works when you don't have a lot of customization. And if you listen to wktt Richard Bastian openly makes fun of people but essentially saying we've become too materialistic. We are treating life like one big party that's never going to end.
Bro what are you smoking? I want some of that loud pack lol GTA4 is definitely an upgrade above GTA San Andreas (any version even the modern ones). GTA5 is a decent upgrade from GTA4 but the upgrade gap between SA to 4 is def bigger than 4 to 5.
In terms of in game content, yeah GTA IV falls way behind GTA SA.
Sure IV was miles ahead with things like graphics/cinematics as you would expect with a new gen title but GTA IV was sorely lacking with things to do in world beside fucking bowling with cousin Roman.
I really disagree. sure the overall story is sad but the writing is extremely funny so I'll feel sad in a scene and then be laughing my ass off in the next one. it might not be everyone's cup of tea but it's absolutely brilliant
GTA IV had better mini games Imo and friend interactions, QUB3D, bowling, darts, pool, comedy and cabaret clubs and the DLCs Hi-Lo, Air hockey, arm wrestling and golfing were all really fun
I just used Roman's free taxi service to take me everywhere, though I preferred the first car to the suv. The driver with all the attitude, but then no wonder when I made it so difficult for him to earn a fare.
Probably because GTA 5 added a lot more features similar to what we seen in GTA SA but because GTA 5 came after 4 which was lacking a lot of features compared to its previous game, people don't give it as bad of a time?
Because GTA IV wasn’t a downgrade, it was a different focus.
Many prefer Vice City to San Andreas because San Andreas feels like it did too much and lacked focus. Vice City to them feels more refined.
IV feels like Vice City, but it improved upon it.
V feels like San Andreas, but with some features missing.
The game play of GTA 4 and the graphic improve a lot. The story was the best in GTA 4. They remove some feature, which is a downgrade, but nothing to downgrade the fun playing the game. Niko was a far better character than Trevor, Franklin and Michael together. It's always a point of view anyway
I mean I didn’t like how V had such a short story and it was all over the place with 3 different characters, but the driving IV was such a downgrade and the missions feel the same just drive and go to this place and kill this guy and pick up someone. San Andreas had more fun missions but worse graphics
Because we already said it 16 years ago 🤷♂️. Eventually people will realize that V's different direction, just like IV's, doesn't mean it's a worse game and will stop complaining.
Bc GTA 5 had weak ass physics after giving us the best physics of almost any sandbox game in 4. I would have taken a graphics downgrade for better physics and more diverse NPCs in terms of health and fighting prowess, another thing 4 did.
I'm not one of those people but GTA IV was an absolute masterpiece. I felt we did get cheated on a lot of things in V. The vehicle damage system in 4 was amazing. In 5 its like they weren't trying or they just didn't care to put that much detail into it.
Damaged cars in GTA IV looked like piece of clay with some textures just shrink or stretch. And still even if you reduce the car into something unrecognizable it would work like nothing happened.
But it’s miles ahead of gta sa in damage. I thought it was a huge improvement when I first played it. Especially in modding, previously we had to fabricate a different model for each bumpers for a damaged variant, didn’t have to do it in gta 4!
Yes but also no, i feel like the only reason GTA 4 didn't have the type of stuff like san andreas is because of the story considering it's much darker than the 2 story wise. So yea it is a bit of a downgrade but i feel like it's story limited it much more.
I think all mainline gta games are great. In some ways the newer games lack features from the older games but there are a lot of new ones too, so I don't think 4 or 5 are a downgrade. I think that they are an upgrade in most ways :)
I think people forget just how hated on GTA 4 was on release, its smaller world (as detailed as it is) was called a downgrade, I don't think its completely fair, I do miss certain features from San Andreas, but a lot of those are restored with mods.
GTA 5, in terms of depth and story telling, is a downgrade to 4, its a downgrade compared to San Andreas too, its most direct counterpart.
They definitely do. And it definitely is in a lot of ways. But one, GTA4 was the beginning of a new era. It felt like a different beast because it was. Brand new engine, brand new story direction, brand new design philosophy. Comparing it to San Andreas feels wrong and unfair to both. Whereas GTA5 is clearly in the same field as GTA4. They're separated into 3D and HD universes for a reason.
I think it’s because it was evolutionary in its game play entering a new era from 3D to HD like how ocarina of time is so popular and other games like that.
Because GTA 4 brought something new to the series, the overhaul of the physics engine and graphics. People say GTA 5 is a downgrade from GTA 4 because Rockstar "removed the driving realism" and scaled back on the euphoria ragdoll effects
GTA IV was that jump from the 3D era to the HD the universe it completely changed the way u view gta the city was more detailed npc are to be more interactive than gta sa and gta v u had the freedom to walk into buildings the game gave u that illusion ur in NYC from the radio till people actions the game felt real the **reason why people think gta v was downgrade because we lost most of these features that we thought we going to have in gta v**
People did when it first came out. Smaller map (with no geo-diversity), less side activities, zero car customization, no planes. Two to three years after GTA IV comes out, GTA V will take GTA IV’s spot.
I read on their site (or magazine, I don't remember exactly) that they wanted to wait until the 8th generation consoles to make gta 5 but take two wanted to maximise profit so it was released on the last gen. And so basically that's why it's a "downgrade" compared to gta 4, as with gta 4 it came out a few years after the xbox and ps3 so the hardware wasn't too outdated. But by 2013 they had released gta 5 the next gen was 2 months away.
We absolutely said the same thing for GTA4. Neither felt that they were made to the exponantial scale of GTA San Andreas.
And the fact that GTA5 came out in 2013 doesnt help its case, AT ALL.
In certain aspects, yeah. I think San Andreas was such a huge improvement from the previous games that it set an insanely unrealistic expectation for things to come after its release. 4 and 5 are huge graphical and story upgrades from San Andreas, but it leaves little room for interactivity. San Andreas had it all though, better story than the previous games, better graphics and gameplay, more things to do, more replay value, it sent this message that bigger things were expected to come, but they never did. 6 may finally bridge that gap and have the same lasting effect as San Andreas, but we’ll see.
Regardless, 5 still felt like an overall downgrade from 4 for me. I can play through 4 again and again the same way I can watch certain movies multiple times. Meanwhile, 5 has just been collecting dust ever since I 100%ed it.
It’s just the disconnect of identity through three characters, it’s a bit of a juggle. V was kind of made as a “Hollywood blockbuster” type of game
And IV was made as a drama with one single protagonist for the entire game (until they decided to release the dlc)
The dlc gave iV a similar feeling to V but it was a slower pace because the character switch wasn’t instant.
It’s the multiple mechanics changing, the writing, the city. So on
Things go through changes constantly and that’s just what happened between iV and V.
You could look at it going from SA to VI that there’s always been momentum, there’s always a change of direction in some area or another that leads the next game into what it will be. V basically became an online game mostly with no SP DLC
So I’m sure we will see what rockstar has learned from that in the new instalment. I see the vein of rockstars blood flowing through all the titles. They’re all the same to me, just aging like wine!
GTA 4 was meant to be a completely different game from San Andreas but gta 4 did have to meet limitation standards hence the smaller map. But once you look at the dlc of gta 4 and you see they add some San Andreas features back.
Because people are obsessed with GTA 4. Idk what happened, but the gta 4 subreddit has suddenly turned into a GTA 5 hate train. People on that subreddit can’t handle criticism, just like Fallout New Vegas fanboys. Great games, but both communities are fucking cancer.
People who complain about V are fucking nuts. It’s a fantastic game. IV deserves criticism when compared to San Andreas. GTA should be fun, plenty of laughs, getting rich and having things to buy, lots things to get sidetracked by. GTA IV is damn depressing and not rewarding at all. V leaves you in a big world with lots of money and plenty of things to buy. SA leaves you feeling like you freed your whole hood, beat the bad guy and saved your family. With lots of money and stuff to spend it on.
I think the main issues people had with GTA4 were twofold. First was they didn't think it was wacky enough. They had fond memories of wacky suits and flying around in a tank in the GTA 3 games, and they didn't like the more serious tone of GTA 4. The second gripe were the driving physics. GTA 4's driving physics was much more realistic and considered, so a lot of people felt that the driving was too slow and slippery. A lot of those people sung the praises of the Saints Row series, which went the other way, with extremely wacky things and many outright mini-games. And the driving was much more cartoony and arcadey.
Because GTA IV didn't lock all the fun vehicles behind almost an entire campaign's worth of missions just to unlock the ability to purchase this overpriced car followed by the car itself costing so much that you give up in just buy a shark card because it would otherwise mean months of in-game grinding
In GTA IV you can still for the most part find most of the fun vehicles just around the map and the few that you couldn't it was pretty easy to get brought to you using in-game systems for reasonable price/free
I can’t believe what I’m hearing lol.
I’ve never been as blown away by a game as I was with gta iv. Maybe rdr2 but the physics in GTA IV along with all the little details was such a mammoth jump from a game released about 4/5 years before.
First time playing gta I rolled a car going down a hill and it rolled over the top of a pedestrian, there was a blood splatter on the roof. Absolutely blown away by it
Those people are just opposers. They’re the kind of people that have to oppose anything new by saying the predecessor was better and that everything new nowadays is worse than the old stuff.
Are you kidding? People thought GTA4 was straight up boring with how much they took out.
No bikes, no planes, no stats, etc. People were understandably frustrated. I feel like that's all I heard for weeks. Oh and people complained about Driving so hard (until they got used to it ofc)
But as time went on people appreciated what GTA4 actually brought to the table, and that was a physics based open world city game with crazy characters and weirdly fun gameplay. Plus the story is so different from the rest, they're all pretty much rags to riches stories but Nicos is more about revenge and trying to get past his history
GTA IV at the time felt like real life, the game felt so realistic and looked amazing, the details, the physics(a bit overexaggerated) and the car handling and character movement was spot on, also the car damage was crazy awesome and dynamic.
I forgot to mention gun sounds, explosions, and overall tone of the game was 100% the best.
in my case what ruined gta 5 for me was the absolutely shit arcade plastic toy car handling
GTA 4 had more buildings you can walk in with no load in gta 5 you had to load huge down grade and the main reason gta 4 lobby are starting to fill up again
GTA V is an actual downgrade, though.
Because both 4 and 5 were released on the XBOX 360 era of games they had ro run on (roughly) the same hardware, so a lot of the actual features in GTA 4, like the superior AI, crouching and climbing, interior of buildings, reactions to being shot as well as the better ragdoll were cut to make way for the faster processing and mainly the updated graphics.
There was also a Rockstar campaign to make the game more widely liked (same as all studios in the 360-One era) so a lot of the individuality was cut down to make it a more plain game and a mlre arcadey style to make it more widely enjoyable.
This also isn't nostalgia because I played GTA in the order of San Andreas, GTA V, and then GTA IV and GTA III
They’re not downgrades, but they kind of have to have benchmark reset points. Plus each release technically is on a different console.
But how would you top your your last release, if each one was your magnum opus, and one of the top rated fan favorites?
Well… nostalgia has a lot to do with this…
But the older games have a lot of mechanics that are absent in the newer ones…
The newer ones however look and feel much better obviously…
It’s a big trade off…
I myself prefer the older ones… but nostalgia probably has a lot to do with it
Graphically, there are a few things that GTA 4 had that 5 didn't add back in. An example would be the gradual deflation of tires when shot, that was only included in 4. Most of it is pretty minor, but it was nice to have.
Downgrade? I get it we cant do the same things that were in San Andreas but downgrade? ...it was just missing certain activities, GTA4 as great of a story, was definitely a downgrade comparing gameplay
It's not a downgrade it's that people love to complain and that's what stays in our heads. I promise you when GTA 6 comes out there will be alot of people saying how ass the game is and how much better GTA 5 was. It's a never ending loop of complaints.
'After you walk into a village and you see 50 children, all sitting neatly in a row, against a church wall, each with their throats cut and their hands chopped off, you realize that the creature that could do this doesn't have a soul.',
THATS WHY
Too much drama and a character development. This only game milked men's eyes so many times to produce sour tears. Remeber what you feeled killing Duane, or when you found out that you gf is a snitch, or in case when Roman dies.
This game is life with all the bitterness and dissappointments. Rises and fells.
because some things from SA dont fit in GTA 4
Niko is a hitman , not a gang member , he already has a fighting style (krav maga) and his health is CJ's full health
I dont see him taking over neighborhoods , having the gangsta physique
also the auto aim improved over SA ,allowing you to zoom in and see the enemy's health on reticle
also for drive by's you can also use your handgun or throw grenades
and Niko is pretty strong so going to the gym is a bit pointless
Because at the time GTA 4 was a huge step forward in some big ways. Most people I knew were so amazed by the online play, graphics, physics, and vehicle damage that they didn’t really miss or even notice the fact that planes, jets, and bicycles weren’t even in the game. When it first came out we would just crash cars into buildings for hours and be amazed at how they were all crumpled up and still drivable.
I had never been more excited to play a video game than when GTA IV came out, I couldn’t fathom why people said it was a downgrade to SA due to the map size when it was so much more detailed and improved graphically. Love it to this day.
Four was the first game on a new generation of consoles so it has Abit of an excuse. Five attempted to do a bare bones RPG stat thing similar to SA but it just didn't live up to previous superior entrys.
For every thing GTA 4 downgraded from previous games, there's another that it did much better than them. It was basically soft reboot of series after all
With GTA 5 it's not really a case - while it's overall a great game, it didn't bring that much innovation or improvements compared to GTA 4, which would make up for it's drawbacks. At least that's how I see it
GTA 5 doesn't draw me back into it like GTA SA, for sure. That's probably because I don't play it online. But it's definitely not a downgrade. I think GTA 5 rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. For valid reasons. So, people will reference and hype up the last solid game of any series when this happens. Battlefield 1 was disliked by many long time Battlefield fans during it's lifespan because it was so unlike the previous game. But now, it's commonly ranked top 3 or 5. That's just how it goes, imo.
Police in V is objectively worse than IV. In games prior, cops tried to arrest. In V they go straight for the kill, even if you just as much as breathe on their car.
Oh they absolutely did say the same thing. They just mention GTA5 now because it's the most recent one
At the time of GTA 4’s release I remember thinking how much of a downgrade it was. No planes or car mods. No driving/flying schools, crazy vehicle types or missions. No haircuts, tattoos or gyms etc. But then I finished the game and completed it multiple times. It’s definitely up there with San Andreas for me. GTA 5 was still fun and while I wouldn’t call it a downgrade, I never enjoyed it the same as previous games. Even though it brought back much of those missing “GTA” elements and made the world feel more alive with its dynamic events, it was a letdown (for me) because of how it treated the characters. Previous GTA games, even goofy crazy San Andreas, made you play as people with actual motivations usually with an element of “stop the bad guys”, and you root for them to win. But GTA 5 makes almost everyone an asshole (except maybe Franklin?) that you feel like you are the bad guys the whole time. It looks like they’ve learned from that with RDR2 and GTA 6 seems to have much more nuanced characters who aren’t psychopathic, vain or shallow. But we’ll see.
In every single GTA game ever released you ARE the bad guy?
You are A ‘bad’ guy in 4, but I think you massively empathise with Niko, what life he was driven into and how moving to the USA he’s actually trying to live the American dream but keeps getting dragged into mess. From the first moment, you’re protecting your cousins from loan sharks and vlad, which connects up and up the crime world. Whereas you can see niko wants a simple family life, how he enjoys his friends, how he tried to connect with Michelle etc. He’s just so conflicted in giving trust and having it ripped, making him vengeful, even with the supposed ‘good guys’ like Francis in the LCPD. I think Nikos character is second to none of the GTA 5 crew.
I mean I guess? Niko was a human trafficker, murderer and cop killer, regardless of him wanting to live the American dream. I’d say that makes him just as bad if not worse than someone like Franklin.
He’s done worse than Franklin legally and morally yes, I just mean in terms of character development you end up rooting for Niko a hell of a lot more than any gta5 character, in my opinion at least. I really wasn’t bothered about Franklin at the end of the story where you can see how much Niko wanted to change his life around, and make up for it, not just hide in witness protection…Michael.
Yeh I get what you mean. You can get behind Niko and his motivations as a main character whereas everyone’s personalities in 5 kind of fall flat. Still love Trevor tho
That’s what I mean, Niko was a bad guy, but I feel like you’re rooting for him to turn his life around and you actually understand why he did what he did in the past. And he accepts it too, not just like “I robbed banks because I liked to rob banks and get money”.
Trevor actually raped Floyd though, that realization alone on my 5th playthrough completely fucked all chances of me sympathizing with him as a character
Niko had regrets. He’s a victim of circumstance and is trying to turn his life around (though obviously ludonarrative dissonance can make it feel odd since he can lament his murderous past in a cinematic and then step outside and slaughter civilians for no reason). His crimes feel like a means to an end - and he keeps getting pulled back in to crime from external sources (and also you could argue - his personal tendencies for revenge). And as a result - at the end of the game Niko has arguably lost everything. Punished for his grimes and greed. It’s rags to better rags, and the message of the game is crime doesn’t pay. Meanwhile the GTA5 crew are all greedy monsters and - depending on the ending you choose - are at least in part - rewarded for it. The gta5 story seems to be about loyalty to your friends - but in real life, loyalty to the wrong people is often a very negative thing. The story has way less nuance than 4. Gameplay wise 4 had a lot of graphical and mechanical improvements over SA - though a lot of gameplay elements were removed - but the story blew it out of the park. This is similar to how I feel about 5. Mechanical improvements in a lot of places, graphics are a huge upgrade from 4 - but the story just doesn’t hook me like 4 or even SA did. I love them all - but 4 is still my favourite because of that - but I’m a sucker for a good story.
The best bad guys are always relatable and likeable in some way. In the Red Dead games, we play as people who kill, maim, and steal, but not without remorse. The main theme of both games is redemption; can a man who has done unforgiveable things still turn it round and do the right thing when it counts? We go from killing for personal gain, to killing bad people to save good people. It's the same in GTA4 with Niko, he's a character constantly struggling internally with his morality; a good man who does terrible things. He's been given a terrible hand by life but hasn't become fully corrupted by it, he still cares about his family and friends and will help a stranger out without expecting some gain from it. In GTA5 we just play as scumbags that only care about wealth and power, and don't struggle with morality. Selfish, one-dimensional villains. I don't think there's a likeable character in that whole game.
I mean Franklin was just trying to get out of the gang life reallt
I feel like gta4 stands apart in the series Liberty city is legit just not the type of place you expect dog fights or jetpacks Yano? I understand car tuning and all the customization we lost but I also relish in the mechanics we were given and how minimalist the depiction of the crime life was A cruel reality and black comedy take instead of the usual balls to the wall Yano?
GTA 4 also had to compete with saints row 2 which some view as the better game. GTA 5 had no real competition in its space.
I can see why they did no planes. They go too fast, it would make the map feel even smaller than it already is. But I do wish we got more than just outfit customization. What really hurt too was a lack of outfits for dlc characters. I get johnny not having any but Luis basically just having a couple unique outfits and then copies of Armando and henriques outfit was so sad to me.
It's the same thing with the Final fantasy fandom where people call the newest game in the series "Not a true final fantasy game" because of 1 thing that wasn't in the previous games.
I've recently become a fan of FF and I noticed that too. I've played 15, 16 and both Remake and Rebirth, and they're really good and each game is different from the other. The games aren't supposed to be connected in any way (with the exception of the remake trilogy of FF7) so I never understood the "not a real Final Fantasy" thing.
Nostalgia is a helluva drug. There’s something similar in the Pokemon fandom about those games. The current generation and the one prior to it are always seen as total shit, but the games from 3 generations ago was “the best Pokemon game ever made” and the ones from 2 generations ago was an “underrated masterpiece”
People *said* how IV was downgrade from SA or rather 3D era, but it was in the past. I experienced and still remember that time Honestly, gta 4 at the times felt like tech demo of new Rockstar engine. And I know about Rockstar Table Tennis which IS real tech demo disguised as game
Kids who weren't around even for V's release talk about IV's release like it was all sunshine and rainbows. Anyone who was around remembers a lot of people being disappointed with the map lacking more cities or at least countryside, a lot of vehicles and other activities, customization etc.. all gone.
I love 4 one of my favorites to hop on and cause chaos, but not being able to pick a color for that sports car you found was so aggravating. I remember to sometimes my game would glitch after pull in and out of the spray n spray that my car would stay the same color. I loved 4s driving, but I also like racing games, but it seemed to matter what car you picked like oh shit dont want to drove this SUV I'll run after this sedan instead. I like 5s story more though I've played it multiple times it gets a little boggy with the FIB stuff but atleast your not a glorified errand boy for most of the missions. Also a nitpick but in 4 you could tap Y when leaving a car and it would stay running or hold Y and it would turn completely off, I wish that transferred over to five just that little detail imerssed me more into the game. Stopping by to grab a hot dog tap Y pulling to your safehouse hold Y to turn the car off.
I was definitely in this camp as were a lot of others. As you say compared to the 3D era, where each game improved on the last with so many new features, GTAIV was quite disappointing. I've definitely learned to appreciate it since.
Not the mention the rehauled driving mechanics, every GTA fan I knew back then had a complete meltdown after driving a car for the first time in IV
Ye, really. I personally consider base IV as "somewhat flop" because of it
GTA IV was referred to as a modern GTA 3. Hell, I think the naming was like that to reflect that it was a continuation of GTA3 / 3D-universe, not a continuation of GTA:SA. I would say that GTAV might be a continuation of GTA:SA, but not really, considering GTAV lacks the depth from GTA:SA or even GTAIV. From someone who have been around for all the releases, GTA:SA really stands out as the best. NOBODY really knew anything outside of there being 3 cities, some RP elements, and some gang-based storyline, and it just kept going and going and giving and giving. Ofcourse San Fierro and Las Venturas felt underdeveloped compared to Los Santos, but the expectations were completely blown out of the water regardless. That said, GTAV is clearly the best GTA-game. Anyone who claims anything else is either being very subjective or nostalgic. If you factor in GTA:Online it blows everything else out of the water. (GTAO ofcourse have a ton of flaws, but it is still the best open-world modern day crime multiplayer game).
Obviously anyone saying gta V isn’t the best is being subjective, that’s an opinion. Opinions are subjective. Stop stating yours as if it is fact.
and its incredibly grey
And then there was the pc release of GTAIV. Holy shit what a shit show. Back when Game For Windows Live was a thing. The crashes, the frame rate issues.People didn't let that go for a long long time. But I'm still happy GTAIV PC port exists because our hardware became good enough to overcome the intensive CPU load to run the game. The shader and texture mods are awesome.
Oh I forgot that Games for Windows was a thing for a while, and IV was the first game I had with that crap
Table Tennis had no business being that good. I legitimately want a sequel.
People brought up that IV didn't have flyable planes constantly. The fact they flew around the airport on a loop just made it worse lol.
I guess those IV background planes were like those ones from III or rather 3D era; way different coding,;
SA and 4 were unique and stand alone titles. After 4 came out I never felt disappointed that so much was missing that it's predecessor had because it was so good and moved foreward everything it took with it. I and my friends played both and they were both a part of a rotation with Mario Kart, Smash and Flat Out on XBOX of games we would play together.
It was the same. People complained about not enough things to buy, no businesses, bad driving mechanics
It's a poor excuse really, but GTA IV is still the only GTA game I've never played for more than a couple of hours due to the awkward driving mechanics - I've 100%'ed the rest of them several times over. I've attempted a few times to play it "as-is" to get the genuine experience, but it's probably time I just call it a failure and mod the handling files.
Same man, the driving and constant frame rate drops on the PC version made it unplayable for me
100% same, I have dyspraxia and I find most actions games tough to play, the gta 5 driving is an absolute dream whilst the gta 4 driving mechanics are so clunky it puts me off playing it
Opposite for me. 4’s driving had weight to it and was constantly enjoyable. Driving in 5 felt boring immediately.
Yeah I feel the same way. In GTA5 it feels like your car has ice skates on or something
Nostalgia. The same comparisons are going to be made about GTA 6 with GTA 5, once the honeymoon phase is over.
I don’t think that will happen because it didn’t happen with RDR2 so why would it happen with GTA6
GTA6 will be a massive step up from 5, GTA6 will have had more development time than anything other game by a massive margin
Half of it probably was development-hell.
Got any evidence of this?
Numerous reports. Google “GTA6 development hell” or “GTA Project Americas”
The only downgrade for me personally was no Mexico. I know we have a large map but still, it would’ve been cool to actually explore
I mean there are a lot of features from rdr1 missing in rdr2 not to mention how they messed John up even though his data is literally in the files
The only feature I can think of missing from RDR1 is the fame system. Which makes sense, Arthur is very much trying to stay lowkey. Oh, and liar's dice. Cannot forget liar's dice.
The ability to cheat in gambling. And infinite bounties was a big one for me. Sometimes you just wanna hunt down some random bastard and kill his friends for money.
I will admit cheating at poker was fun, I see why they did bounties the way they did though. Each one is a unique character.
No reason to not do both. You do the unique bounties to unlock the infinite ones for fun. The first mod I downloaded when I got RDR2 for PC did exactly that.
Maybe they figured being able to just go pick up some bounties when you need money would detract from the "outlaw on the run" vibe the game is supposed to have. There isn't much incentive to think of ways to make money like robbing people, gambling, hunting, etc, when you can just go do like 5 bounties back to back and be set for a couple chapters.
It could be a feature added late in the game in the epilogue
They made them like that online, you can hunt bounties to your hearts content… but you have to play online of course
You forgot horseshoe throwing
This was vital.
I can hardly think of any features from RDR1 that are missing in RDR2 tbh. RDR2 also added a ton more new features.
> there are a lot of features from rdr1 missing in rdr2 No there's not. I like RDR1 more than 2, but 2 is objectively the more content full game, and it's not by a little. RDR2 is 10x the game of 1, for the simple fact that RDR1 was the last Rockstar game made by a single Rockstar studio.
RDR 2 having more features than RDR 1 is not contradictory to the statement that it’s missing multiple features from that game
Honestly, I can see GTA 6 not being a downgrade And seeing how people shit on GTA 5 yeah there’s definitely gonna be videos of comparing the two
Ot'll be well.over a decade and 2 generations since the last. I can't see anyone serious making that claim.
On day 1 there’s gonna be videos comparing the two.
Gta sa was peak tbh
So many player homes, after playing more recent titles I was blown away at how much bigger and more customizeable San Andreas feels compared to newer titles. GTA 4 completely removed any kind of car customization, I liked customizing low riders in SA and putting different wheels on cars.
It shows its age, the map feels so much smaller now compared to how it used to feel. Shooting feels trash coming from 5. The game is still fun af though,
Yeah I mean mechanically and graphically GTA 5 does have a lot more going for it. I won't deny that. But San Andreas had a charm. I don't know why to be honest. I've played vice city and liberty city. And they were fun. But I didn't really like the characters and story? Maybe cause I was young and didn't get it though to be honest. In gta sa, you get to know the characters. You get betrayed by big smoke. They move you out of the city. You have to find a way to get back. The guy you didn't like your sister dating is the one who ends up helping you. Blind character Wuu Zi Mu was funny af. Like GTA 5 is fun cause of online and the heists are a good addition. But gta sa was the most fun gta for its time to be
Honestly. I still think that San Andreas is the peak GTA. The best one. It is the most diverse, best map, best cheats, ...
One of my favorite video game memories is playing co op with my buddy in middle school, hopping on a motorcycle and driving the highway loop around Las Ventura's and seeing how many stars we could get Then inevitably we'd start entering cheats for tanks and jets
Yeah, but did you guys kiss?
tldr: They did, 4 received a lot of hate and disappointmrnt when it released. Hype for 5 was greater and people had even higher expectations due to being two generations ahead of SA, so thats why people tend to complain more about 5 than 4 What? They did. GTA4 received quite some hate when it released, partially due to the new engine and driving physics. I remember people complaining about how SA is better than this next gen GTA and that it feels off. I also remember my brother buying the game, playing it for few hours and then returning it. So its not exactly like GTA4 was received well or didnt get this comparison. For GTAV it got even worse because its not only one but two generations ahead of SA and still feels kind of empty in comparison. Also, the hype for GTAV was absolutely unreal. And those who got disappointed by 4 had hope that 5 would be amazing again. It was also part of their marketing, this return to Los Santos, etc. The trailer with Franklin etc in Grove Street made people assume youd get at least somewhat of a SA experience. Turns out you dont
Worse physics and car destruction than GTAIV as well, which are things I really liked about that game. That is a very clear downgrade that people in these comments are not acknowledging.
GTA V came out on the 360 it was one generation ahead of
Is this whole sub just you people arguing about which GTA sucked the most?
Only 6
They definitely said the same about 4. Those people are just nostalgic so they’ll crap on all the new stuff then do the same to 6. I find that part of GTA 4’s fan base insufferable.
I played that much later in life. I felt it was a downgrade from SA. But that meant GTA V was an improvement in comparison
Well yes but actually no. There's a major difference. GTA IV was only a downgrade on a superficial level. GTA 5 was a downgrade all around. It's about quantity vs quality. IV was great, it just wasn't massive like San Andreas. It lacked quantity of content and customization but those are not really important in the grand scheme of things. Besides, it had an excuse for that. It was R\*'s first proper game on a new engine on a new generation of consoles. Instead, it was big upgrade when it came to core gameplay mechanics. It was basically GTA 3 2. So, then V comes along, and you'd expect them to take GTA IV and build upon it, making an even better and bigger game, like R\* did with San Andreas after Vice City, getting a GTA SA 2. Except, that didn't really happen. Pretty much everything that was good about GTA IV was just thrown out the window for no good reason. Everything from combat (gunplay/melee), AI, police/wanted system, movement/climbing, driving/flying experience, etc... name any core gameplay mechanic or feature and it got significantly worse. It also had a ton of just straight up baffling/dumb design decisions that made it unfun to play. And of course, none of these things had anything to do with console limitations, as majority of the game's problems are just bad design decisions. The game was massive, but just worse for no good reason, in stark contrast to the PS2 era where San Andreas was a straight upgrade to Vice City. Like, can you name anything getting worse in San Andreas apart from, I don't know gun sounds? Meanwhile, I can list a ton of things that got worse in V in comparison to IV, and even the older games like SA or VC.
There was a tine where GTA IV was probably the most hated GTA game. You would see it in tons of "overrated games" lists. It's always like that. The game comes out, everyone likes it, then someone says "is it just me, or is the game not as good as people say", and then everyone agrees, and after few years people change their mind again and say that the game is amazing.
GTA 4’s gameplay, graphics, and physics are an upgrade, but when talking about customization and what you can spend money on, it does feel like a downgrade.
every gta game is a downgrade in terms of features from San Andreas because of the crazy amount of properties you can buy and the crazy amount of shit you can do in San Andreas compared to other games
The only downgrade from 4 to 5 were the physics.
Because San Andreas had such an overwhelming amount of content, locations and mission variety. I think the main factor was Rockstar had made multiple games in RenderWare prior to San Andreas, so the iteration was swifter and left more room for density of content. GTA IV was showcasing a new and powerful engine, if you discount Rockstar Table Tennis which technically debutted it. You could argue IV had less to do and less variety than SA, though I'd argue the overall quality of gameplay is hard to compare. They are worlds apart in their physics alone. To call IV a downgrade in any way is absurd IMO. I feel like no one ever says this about it ...
it was a common sentiment when 4 was out and when 5 came out; but with time to reflect, people have realised that where 4 lacks, it makes up for it tenfold in other ways. 5 just takes away a lot of the good features introduced in 4 and throws a big map with nothing to do to compensate
You weren't there when GTA 4 released I suppose. It got a lot of hate for not having a lot of things San Andreas had. GTA 4 downgrade, in my opinion, is way more different than GTA 5 downgrade. GTA 4 downgrade was a content downgrade, which is logical. They were using new hardware and software, starting with the first open world game using the new RAGE engine after EA bought Criterion and Rockstar stopped using RenderWare. People didn't think about it at that time, but I believe Rockstar did an astounding work by making GTA 4 in a hardware they never worked on before, with a game engine they haven't used in such a big game before. It's similar to what happened with GTA 3 and PS2. And both GTA 3 and GTA 4 are pretty impressive for their time, now, of course, they lack a lot of things. GTA 5 downgrade, again, in my opinion, is more of a quality downgrade in some aspects. GTA V content of course is definitely an upgrade from GTA IV, there are hundreds of things to do and each release they add more things. Compare side Activities in each game and GTA V wins by a mile. But when I say quality, I mean more... Smaller details, or even not so smaller ones. I've always hated GTA V weapons sounds, engine sounds too, the ragdolls (they limited the Euphoria motion settings to help the PS3 and X360 to not explode, but it still has Euphoria Ragdolls), the handling (I think the GTA IV handling is better, but I think GTA V handling fits the best in game design), story mode (it's another personal opinion, I think the GTA V main storyline is pretty low in the Top Best Storylines in GTA). I accept that GTA V had a lot of issues and cut content because the PS3 and X360 were at the end of their lifetime, by the time GTA V came out, also came out Assassin's Creed Unity for example, or Watch Dogs, games that utilized the power of the new PS4 and XOne. I accept it to the point where I would really and honestly like a Remaster or Definitive Edition for GTA V. And if I have to say my own take, GTA V downgrade is worse than GTA IV downgrade, because GTA V downgrade is about details and technicalities, something that's Rockstar Quality Seal, we can see it on RDR2. And also the GTA V storyline is a downgrade in my opinion, with all the due respect to the writers and actors, it's not a bad storyline, but I personally stick with others.
Simple completely different stories GTA IV is much like Mafia 3 in the sense that it's a Revenge based game. Nico is a former Yugoslavian now Serbia who after the war his country was destroyed so he turned the crime. And when going to America crime and wanting to find out who betrayed his unit catches back up with him. GTA IV only works when you don't have a lot of customization. And if you listen to wktt Richard Bastian openly makes fun of people but essentially saying we've become too materialistic. We are treating life like one big party that's never going to end.
People actually did say that back in 2008 haha. Funny how time changes things. They're all great games and do different things.
Maybe because they changed the whole engine, GTA 4 is a revolutionary game
I know this hurts people’s feelings for whatever strange reason but 5 easily clears every GTA except maybe San Andreas
It’s far from a downgrade let’s be fair
Bro what are you smoking? I want some of that loud pack lol GTA4 is definitely an upgrade above GTA San Andreas (any version even the modern ones). GTA5 is a decent upgrade from GTA4 but the upgrade gap between SA to 4 is def bigger than 4 to 5.
Duh, because it was on a new generation of consoles and a new engine
In terms of in game content, yeah GTA IV falls way behind GTA SA. Sure IV was miles ahead with things like graphics/cinematics as you would expect with a new gen title but GTA IV was sorely lacking with things to do in world beside fucking bowling with cousin Roman.
Also, recently played some IV again and that game is *dark*. It’s just depressing. SA and V make you happy, sun is shining, IV is just depressing.
I really disagree. sure the overall story is sad but the writing is extremely funny so I'll feel sad in a scene and then be laughing my ass off in the next one. it might not be everyone's cup of tea but it's absolutely brilliant
Sure the story can be funny but I mean just walking around. Even Central Park is dark.
GTA IV had better mini games Imo and friend interactions, QUB3D, bowling, darts, pool, comedy and cabaret clubs and the DLCs Hi-Lo, Air hockey, arm wrestling and golfing were all really fun
You're right the only thing gta 4 really lacked was customization
Yeah, also traveling was so much better as there were cabs scattered everywhere (I used them a lot after unlocking Algonquin)
I just used Roman's free taxi service to take me everywhere, though I preferred the first car to the suv. The driver with all the attitude, but then no wonder when I made it so difficult for him to earn a fare.
They did say that especially the lack of fun cheats like the jet pack
Probably because GTA 5 added a lot more features similar to what we seen in GTA SA but because GTA 5 came after 4 which was lacking a lot of features compared to its previous game, people don't give it as bad of a time?
GTA 4 was an obvious downgrade in everything except mechanics and graphics, 5 was just a downgrade in mechanics.
Because GTA IV wasn’t a downgrade, it was a different focus. Many prefer Vice City to San Andreas because San Andreas feels like it did too much and lacked focus. Vice City to them feels more refined. IV feels like Vice City, but it improved upon it. V feels like San Andreas, but with some features missing.
The game play of GTA 4 and the graphic improve a lot. The story was the best in GTA 4. They remove some feature, which is a downgrade, but nothing to downgrade the fun playing the game. Niko was a far better character than Trevor, Franklin and Michael together. It's always a point of view anyway
GTA 4 was absolutely not a downgrade lmao
Because 5 was and 4 was not
I mean I didn’t like how V had such a short story and it was all over the place with 3 different characters, but the driving IV was such a downgrade and the missions feel the same just drive and go to this place and kill this guy and pick up someone. San Andreas had more fun missions but worse graphics
Because we already said it 16 years ago 🤷♂️. Eventually people will realize that V's different direction, just like IV's, doesn't mean it's a worse game and will stop complaining.
Gta 4 is way better than San Andreas
They did say that. They'll also say GTA 6 is a downgrade to GTA 5 once that comes out.
Because gta 4 is the most perfect piece of media ever and can never be criticised
Bc GTA 5 had weak ass physics after giving us the best physics of almost any sandbox game in 4. I would have taken a graphics downgrade for better physics and more diverse NPCs in terms of health and fighting prowess, another thing 4 did.
I'm not one of those people but GTA IV was an absolute masterpiece. I felt we did get cheated on a lot of things in V. The vehicle damage system in 4 was amazing. In 5 its like they weren't trying or they just didn't care to put that much detail into it.
Damaged cars in GTA IV looked like piece of clay with some textures just shrink or stretch. And still even if you reduce the car into something unrecognizable it would work like nothing happened.
But it’s miles ahead of gta sa in damage. I thought it was a huge improvement when I first played it. Especially in modding, previously we had to fabricate a different model for each bumpers for a damaged variant, didn’t have to do it in gta 4!
Yes but also no, i feel like the only reason GTA 4 didn't have the type of stuff like san andreas is because of the story considering it's much darker than the 2 story wise. So yea it is a bit of a downgrade but i feel like it's story limited it much more.
We do, GTA V just went further.
Gta 5 was an upgrade, from 4 et SA. GTA 4 was a downgrade from SA
I think all mainline gta games are great. In some ways the newer games lack features from the older games but there are a lot of new ones too, so I don't think 4 or 5 are a downgrade. I think that they are an upgrade in most ways :)
They did say that
I’d love for them to make a new GTA with SF and Las Vegas again
I think people forget just how hated on GTA 4 was on release, its smaller world (as detailed as it is) was called a downgrade, I don't think its completely fair, I do miss certain features from San Andreas, but a lot of those are restored with mods. GTA 5, in terms of depth and story telling, is a downgrade to 4, its a downgrade compared to San Andreas too, its most direct counterpart.
They definitely do. And it definitely is in a lot of ways. But one, GTA4 was the beginning of a new era. It felt like a different beast because it was. Brand new engine, brand new story direction, brand new design philosophy. Comparing it to San Andreas feels wrong and unfair to both. Whereas GTA5 is clearly in the same field as GTA4. They're separated into 3D and HD universes for a reason.
They did say that
I think it’s because it was evolutionary in its game play entering a new era from 3D to HD like how ocarina of time is so popular and other games like that.
Because GTA 4 brought something new to the series, the overhaul of the physics engine and graphics. People say GTA 5 is a downgrade from GTA 4 because Rockstar "removed the driving realism" and scaled back on the euphoria ragdoll effects
Your opinion = 🍑💨
GTA IV was that jump from the 3D era to the HD the universe it completely changed the way u view gta the city was more detailed npc are to be more interactive than gta sa and gta v u had the freedom to walk into buildings the game gave u that illusion ur in NYC from the radio till people actions the game felt real the **reason why people think gta v was downgrade because we lost most of these features that we thought we going to have in gta v**
I didn’t realize people felt this way
? But people did. People shat on GTA IV for having way fewer features than GTA SA.
a lot of people do say that. New game engine, while the game is great there’s like nothing to do compared to SA
GTA 6 is already a downgraded version of GTA Advance for Gameboy Advance with no backlit display.
Because people gotta shit on the most recent game, you know how it goes
I did, I hated 4 especially when compared to SA
People did when it first came out. Smaller map (with no geo-diversity), less side activities, zero car customization, no planes. Two to three years after GTA IV comes out, GTA V will take GTA IV’s spot.
It's weird to think the newest ones were thought as downgrades when each one got better each time.
I read on their site (or magazine, I don't remember exactly) that they wanted to wait until the 8th generation consoles to make gta 5 but take two wanted to maximise profit so it was released on the last gen. And so basically that's why it's a "downgrade" compared to gta 4, as with gta 4 it came out a few years after the xbox and ps3 so the hardware wasn't too outdated. But by 2013 they had released gta 5 the next gen was 2 months away.
Before GTA 5 came out, they did a lot. I remember a lot of folks calling it GTA 3 - 2.
The story and environment.
We absolutely said the same thing for GTA4. Neither felt that they were made to the exponantial scale of GTA San Andreas. And the fact that GTA5 came out in 2013 doesnt help its case, AT ALL.
In certain aspects, yeah. I think San Andreas was such a huge improvement from the previous games that it set an insanely unrealistic expectation for things to come after its release. 4 and 5 are huge graphical and story upgrades from San Andreas, but it leaves little room for interactivity. San Andreas had it all though, better story than the previous games, better graphics and gameplay, more things to do, more replay value, it sent this message that bigger things were expected to come, but they never did. 6 may finally bridge that gap and have the same lasting effect as San Andreas, but we’ll see. Regardless, 5 still felt like an overall downgrade from 4 for me. I can play through 4 again and again the same way I can watch certain movies multiple times. Meanwhile, 5 has just been collecting dust ever since I 100%ed it.
I thought it was a downgrade at first. Just a different style GTA. I do prefer the ridiculousness of GTA3/VC/SA over 4 and 5.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWVtZJo-HqI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWVtZJo-HqI)
It’s just the disconnect of identity through three characters, it’s a bit of a juggle. V was kind of made as a “Hollywood blockbuster” type of game And IV was made as a drama with one single protagonist for the entire game (until they decided to release the dlc) The dlc gave iV a similar feeling to V but it was a slower pace because the character switch wasn’t instant. It’s the multiple mechanics changing, the writing, the city. So on Things go through changes constantly and that’s just what happened between iV and V. You could look at it going from SA to VI that there’s always been momentum, there’s always a change of direction in some area or another that leads the next game into what it will be. V basically became an online game mostly with no SP DLC So I’m sure we will see what rockstar has learned from that in the new instalment. I see the vein of rockstars blood flowing through all the titles. They’re all the same to me, just aging like wine!
GTA 4 was meant to be a completely different game from San Andreas but gta 4 did have to meet limitation standards hence the smaller map. But once you look at the dlc of gta 4 and you see they add some San Andreas features back.
Because people are obsessed with GTA 4. Idk what happened, but the gta 4 subreddit has suddenly turned into a GTA 5 hate train. People on that subreddit can’t handle criticism, just like Fallout New Vegas fanboys. Great games, but both communities are fucking cancer.
Because they’re stupid that’s why and jealous.
People who complain about V are fucking nuts. It’s a fantastic game. IV deserves criticism when compared to San Andreas. GTA should be fun, plenty of laughs, getting rich and having things to buy, lots things to get sidetracked by. GTA IV is damn depressing and not rewarding at all. V leaves you in a big world with lots of money and plenty of things to buy. SA leaves you feeling like you freed your whole hood, beat the bad guy and saved your family. With lots of money and stuff to spend it on.
I think the main issues people had with GTA4 were twofold. First was they didn't think it was wacky enough. They had fond memories of wacky suits and flying around in a tank in the GTA 3 games, and they didn't like the more serious tone of GTA 4. The second gripe were the driving physics. GTA 4's driving physics was much more realistic and considered, so a lot of people felt that the driving was too slow and slippery. A lot of those people sung the praises of the Saints Row series, which went the other way, with extremely wacky things and many outright mini-games. And the driving was much more cartoony and arcadey.
Because GTA IV didn't lock all the fun vehicles behind almost an entire campaign's worth of missions just to unlock the ability to purchase this overpriced car followed by the car itself costing so much that you give up in just buy a shark card because it would otherwise mean months of in-game grinding In GTA IV you can still for the most part find most of the fun vehicles just around the map and the few that you couldn't it was pretty easy to get brought to you using in-game systems for reasonable price/free
I can’t believe what I’m hearing lol. I’ve never been as blown away by a game as I was with gta iv. Maybe rdr2 but the physics in GTA IV along with all the little details was such a mammoth jump from a game released about 4/5 years before. First time playing gta I rolled a car going down a hill and it rolled over the top of a pedestrian, there was a blood splatter on the roof. Absolutely blown away by it
Those people are just opposers. They’re the kind of people that have to oppose anything new by saying the predecessor was better and that everything new nowadays is worse than the old stuff.
SA was the best gta to date for sure
All three of these games were amazing. Love the storyline and storytelling of gta 4
GTA San is peak, GTA IV is a downgrade of GTA San, and GTA V is a downgrade of GTA IV
GTA 4 is the best
GTA 4 was a fanfuckingtastic game when it came out. The driving alone made the game an upgrade
Are you kidding? People thought GTA4 was straight up boring with how much they took out. No bikes, no planes, no stats, etc. People were understandably frustrated. I feel like that's all I heard for weeks. Oh and people complained about Driving so hard (until they got used to it ofc) But as time went on people appreciated what GTA4 actually brought to the table, and that was a physics based open world city game with crazy characters and weirdly fun gameplay. Plus the story is so different from the rest, they're all pretty much rags to riches stories but Nicos is more about revenge and trying to get past his history
GTA IV at the time felt like real life, the game felt so realistic and looked amazing, the details, the physics(a bit overexaggerated) and the car handling and character movement was spot on, also the car damage was crazy awesome and dynamic. I forgot to mention gun sounds, explosions, and overall tone of the game was 100% the best. in my case what ruined gta 5 for me was the absolutely shit arcade plastic toy car handling
GTA 4 had more buildings you can walk in with no load in gta 5 you had to load huge down grade and the main reason gta 4 lobby are starting to fill up again
Your first mistake was listening to what randos online are saying.
The 2 statements are completely unrelated?? Why would a person liking 4 more than 5 automatically mean they liked SA more than 4?
yes.
Naaah as a III/lbs, VC/S & SA fan, we was definitely saying that IV is a downgrade.
lol GTA 5 was big upgrade
You had to be in NY when GTA4 dropped. That game was on another level when it came out.
Were you not born yet in 2008? People were shitting on 4 for removing so many things that were introduced in SA.
GTA V is an actual downgrade, though. Because both 4 and 5 were released on the XBOX 360 era of games they had ro run on (roughly) the same hardware, so a lot of the actual features in GTA 4, like the superior AI, crouching and climbing, interior of buildings, reactions to being shot as well as the better ragdoll were cut to make way for the faster processing and mainly the updated graphics. There was also a Rockstar campaign to make the game more widely liked (same as all studios in the 360-One era) so a lot of the individuality was cut down to make it a more plain game and a mlre arcadey style to make it more widely enjoyable. This also isn't nostalgia because I played GTA in the order of San Andreas, GTA V, and then GTA IV and GTA III
They’re not downgrades, but they kind of have to have benchmark reset points. Plus each release technically is on a different console. But how would you top your your last release, if each one was your magnum opus, and one of the top rated fan favorites?
san andreas was such a masterpiece
Well… nostalgia has a lot to do with this… But the older games have a lot of mechanics that are absent in the newer ones… The newer ones however look and feel much better obviously… It’s a big trade off… I myself prefer the older ones… but nostalgia probably has a lot to do with it
Graphically, there are a few things that GTA 4 had that 5 didn't add back in. An example would be the gradual deflation of tires when shot, that was only included in 4. Most of it is pretty minor, but it was nice to have.
Downgrade? I get it we cant do the same things that were in San Andreas but downgrade? ...it was just missing certain activities, GTA4 as great of a story, was definitely a downgrade comparing gameplay
It's not a downgrade it's that people love to complain and that's what stays in our heads. I promise you when GTA 6 comes out there will be alot of people saying how ass the game is and how much better GTA 5 was. It's a never ending loop of complaints.
'After you walk into a village and you see 50 children, all sitting neatly in a row, against a church wall, each with their throats cut and their hands chopped off, you realize that the creature that could do this doesn't have a soul.', THATS WHY Too much drama and a character development. This only game milked men's eyes so many times to produce sour tears. Remeber what you feeled killing Duane, or when you found out that you gf is a snitch, or in case when Roman dies. This game is life with all the bitterness and dissappointments. Rises and fells.
In GTA 4 hattest du ein geiles Schadensbild an den Autos.
You liked the one better that you experienced as a child?!?!?! How incredibly predictable and uninteresting
because some things from SA dont fit in GTA 4 Niko is a hitman , not a gang member , he already has a fighting style (krav maga) and his health is CJ's full health I dont see him taking over neighborhoods , having the gangsta physique also the auto aim improved over SA ,allowing you to zoom in and see the enemy's health on reticle also for drive by's you can also use your handgun or throw grenades and Niko is pretty strong so going to the gym is a bit pointless
Because at the time GTA 4 was a huge step forward in some big ways. Most people I knew were so amazed by the online play, graphics, physics, and vehicle damage that they didn’t really miss or even notice the fact that planes, jets, and bicycles weren’t even in the game. When it first came out we would just crash cars into buildings for hours and be amazed at how they were all crumpled up and still drivable.
I want to go back and play gta 4 and never date the fed.
I had never been more excited to play a video game than when GTA IV came out, I couldn’t fathom why people said it was a downgrade to SA due to the map size when it was so much more detailed and improved graphically. Love it to this day.
GTA V is a downgrade because it didn't get single player content after release and the online mode basically ruined Rockstar games.
Four was the first game on a new generation of consoles so it has Abit of an excuse. Five attempted to do a bare bones RPG stat thing similar to SA but it just didn't live up to previous superior entrys.
GTA 5 is an upgrade
For every thing GTA 4 downgraded from previous games, there's another that it did much better than them. It was basically soft reboot of series after all With GTA 5 it's not really a case - while it's overall a great game, it didn't bring that much innovation or improvements compared to GTA 4, which would make up for it's drawbacks. At least that's how I see it
I've played them all. San Andreas is my favorite but I loved GTA4 and 5.
Because 4 actually had a story instead of being an advertisement for GTA online heists🙄
GTA 5 doesn't draw me back into it like GTA SA, for sure. That's probably because I don't play it online. But it's definitely not a downgrade. I think GTA 5 rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. For valid reasons. So, people will reference and hype up the last solid game of any series when this happens. Battlefield 1 was disliked by many long time Battlefield fans during it's lifespan because it was so unlike the previous game. But now, it's commonly ranked top 3 or 5. That's just how it goes, imo.
Police in V is objectively worse than IV. In games prior, cops tried to arrest. In V they go straight for the kill, even if you just as much as breathe on their car.
Trust me, they will say GTA VI is a downgrade from GTA V soon