GTA III vs Vice City vs San Andreas vs GTA IV vs GTA V

[zoom17]

GTA V
2. GTA San Andreas
3. GTA Vice City
4. GTA 3

[Scholar]

Damn, people hate on GTA IV for no reason. They're usually just upset because it wasn't GTA SA 2.0. I do think IV should've included all the features of SA and then some, but even though it didn't, IV is still among the greatest current gen (PS3/XBOX 360) games of all-time.
The physics were greater (and still are) than any game I've ever played. Even GTA V, if you run over someone, they just die under the car. In GTA IV, you hit someone with your vehicle and you'll see them fall in various, life-like ways.
In IV, beating someone's ass didn't kill them. In all other GTA games, including V, people die if you whoop their ass.
IV's shooting was superb IMO. It's not on the level of RDR, but it was easy to use and included recoil, something R* didn't include with V for some reason.
Plus, all the extra shit you can do in IV made it worthwhile. You encounter interesting characters, befriend some of them, the story was in-depth detailed, darts and bowling were pretty fun, driving drunk in IV > driving drunk in V because the effect actually lasted long in IV whereas in V the drunkenness wears off quickly, etc.
I still call IV my favorite of the GTA series, but I think gameplay-wise SA and V top it.

All this GTA talk is making me want to buy and download VC now on my PS3. I haven't played that game in several years. Maybe the last time was 2006.

[MavsSuperFan]

Damn, people hate on GTA IV for no reason. They're usually just upset because it wasn't GTA SA 2.0. I do think IV should've included all the features of SA and then some, but even though it didn't, IV is still among the greatest current gen (PS3/XBOX 360) games of all-time.
The physics were greater (and still are) than any game I've ever played. Even GTA V, if you run over someone, they just die under the car. In GTA IV, you hit someone with your vehicle and you'll see them fall in various, life-like ways.
In IV, beating someone's ass didn't kill them. In all other GTA games, including V, people die if you whoop their ass.
IV's shooting was superb IMO. It's not on the level of RDR, but it was easy to use and included recoil, something R* didn't include with V for some reason.
Plus, all the extra shit you can do in IV made it worthwhile. You encounter interesting characters, befriend some of them, the story was in-depth detailed, darts and bowling were pretty fun, driving drunk in IV > driving drunk in V because the effect actually lasted long in IV whereas in V the drunkenness wears off quickly, etc.
I still call IV my favorite of the GTA series, but I think gameplay-wise SA and V top it.

All this GTA talk is making me want to buy and download VC now on my PS3. I haven't played that game in several years. Maybe the last time was 2006.

Did you really enjoy the shooting mechanics of the GTA games before 4, especially in comparison to 4?

In IV, beating someone's ass didn't kill them. In all other GTA games, including V, people die if you whoop their ass.

This is one of the touches that made 4 great.

[blablabla]

Damn, people hate on GTA IV for no reason. They're usually just upset because it wasn't GTA SA 2.0. I do think IV should've included all the features of SA and then some, but even though it didn't, IV is still among the greatest current gen (PS3/XBOX 360) games of all-time.
The physics were greater (and still are) than any game I've ever played. Even GTA V, if you run over someone, they just die under the car. In GTA IV, you hit someone with your vehicle and you'll see them fall in various, life-like ways.
In IV, beating someone's ass didn't kill them. In all other GTA games, including V, people die if you whoop their ass.
IV's shooting was superb IMO. It's not on the level of RDR, but it was easy to use and included recoil, something R* didn't include with V for some reason.
Plus, all the extra shit you can do in IV made it worthwhile. You encounter interesting characters, befriend some of them, the story was in-depth detailed, darts and bowling were pretty fun, driving drunk in IV > driving drunk in V because the effect actually lasted long in IV whereas in V the drunkenness wears off quickly, etc.
I still call IV my favorite of the GTA series, but I think gameplay-wise SA and V top it.

All this GTA talk is making me want to buy and download VC now on my PS3. I haven't played that game in several years. Maybe the last time was 2006.

I think the greatest thing IV had going for it was the sense of immersion, the city was so unbelievably detailed and full of life it was unlike any game i have ever played. Coming fresh off the boat with Niko and taking him on this journey through Liberty City, meeting many great characters and I think this is the main reason why i didn't enjoy GTA V story, in IV you felt like a part of the criminal underworld, even though Niko never was more than a hitman basically, but in V the three protags are doing their own thing almost completely isolated from other gangsters. I really hope they go back to the 1 character system in the next installment.
Another thing i'd like to comment on are the extra things they added to keep you entertained after the main story line, as many people complained about that in IV. First of all Yoga, Tennis and Golf are absolutely useless and an incredible waste of developing Time. Another thing are properties, if you can't enter them to see what you spend your money on it makes the whole thing a million times less enjoyable, then why should i spend big money on a cinema for example when i have to wait 200+ ingame weeks till it starts making profits. And unlike in VC where there was a logical explanation why the Tommy the Boss of VC would buy properties and where he could actually do missions to increase profits in V its never explained why Michael who supposedly wants to retire would buy a nightclub or the sociopath Trevor would go from a meth dealer and murderer to the owner of a Golf Club and considering how underdeveloped a character Franklin is it at least makes sense why there's no explanation why he would do that.

[LexiKhan]

My favourite is still GTA III simply because of the impact it had at the time. It's the mold from where all the others come from and it completely transformed free-roam games. Had cool side-activities, worthwhile collectibles (those hidden packages gave you a ridiculous arsenal to play with), good balance between realism and fun, a great map giving you a nicely sized city that was easy to navigate and familiarize with and had no boring empty areas (a lot of those in GTA V), Chatterbox was hilarious.

[Scholar]

Did you really enjoy the shooting mechanics of the GTA games before 4, especially in comparison to 4?

Not in comparison to modern gaming, but yes, shooting in the old GTA games was enjoyable for their respective time.

[miller-time]

My favourite is still GTA III simply because of the impact it had at the time. It's the mold from where all the others come from and it completely transformed free-roam games. Had cool side-activities, worthwhile collectibles (those hidden packages gave you a ridiculous arsenal to play with), good balance between realism and fun, a great map giving you a nicely sized city that was easy to navigate and familiarize with and had no boring empty areas (a lot of those in GTA V), Chatterbox was hilarious.

Plus the gangs running around were cool and noticeable. You kill someone in Chinatown and the Triads are on your ass, kill someone in Staunton Island and you got the Yakuza. I know there are gangs in V but they just don't seem to be as noticeable. Even though GTA 5 has gangs they just seem to be in the background doing nothing most of the time (if you even notice them at all).

[fsvr54]

Pointless to really rank them, I love them all. Only thing I can say for sure is GTA III is at the bottom. They all have their pros and cons. Although I love it, the flying in San Andreas is so completely game breaking I never beat it.

I'd probably say Vice City is the best as a total focused game package.

And yes, RDR is just as good.

GTA is the greatest franchise in game history. Everyone talks about rampages and killing cops, but what I love most about it is the extremely sharp and hilarious satire on Capitalist culture.

Also, I agree with the dude who mentioned the immersion of IV. New York was so beautifully recreated with an eye for detail. Personally I loved it. ****ing hilarious too for all those who said it was too serious.

[zoom17]

I wonder if all the protagonists in all the gta's got in a fight who would win.

[CelticBaller]

I wonder if all the protagonists in all the gta's got in a fight who would win.

The GTA 3 guy. He had no emotions, and could run backwards

[bergs14]

I wonder if all the protagonists in all the gta's got in a fight who would win.

I got Tommy Vercetti

[knickballer]

My favourite is still GTA III simply because of the impact it had at the time. It's the mold from where all the others come from and it completely transformed free-roam games. Had cool side-activities, worthwhile collectibles (those hidden packages gave you a ridiculous arsenal to play with), good balance between realism and fun, a great map giving you a nicely sized city that was easy to navigate and familiarize with and had no boring empty areas (a lot of those in GTA V), Chatterbox was hilarious.

Yea, GTA 3 was revolutionary. I remember the game came out when I was damn young and everyone was amazed by the graphics and what you were able to do in the game. The fact you can free roam and just drive was enough for us at the time.. The whole killing cops, banging strippers, driving helicopters, etc, was extra for us. The game still looks playable today.

[Scholar]

I just bought Vice City on my PS3. I haven't played that game in years. I figured it'd be fun to take a trip down memory lane.

[Heavincent]

360/PS3: Red Dead Redemption > GTA V > Max Payne 3 > L.A Noire > GTA IV

PS2: SA > Vice City > III

[The-Legend-24]

GTA V.

Vice City had the goat soundtrack tho.