I hope that can be modded out in the PC version.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Is anyone NOT enjoying GTA V?
- Thread starter Dr_Boris_Goltz
- Start date
I hope that can be modded out in the PC version.
I thought riding a motorcycle and bike were great and far from 'shit'. I'd also strongly argue against both Sleeping Dogs and Just Cause 2's shooting being better than GTA V's as I don't think that's true at all. Just Cause 2 especially is pretty poor on this front, still a great game but not because of its shooting. Sleeping Dogs is a melee focused game, so of course those mechanics have to be great (and they are) but again it's shooting isn't great and neither it or its driving are as good as GTA V's IMO. I just found GTA V's mix of tightened up controls and character weight to be pretty damn good and actually judged well in comparison to most of their other RAGE engine games which i felt you sometimes spent too much time fighting against.
I'm certainly not going to say things are perfect with GTA V and they're not. The biggest example being shooting from cars is pretty shit. Melee is serviceable but then I don't think it's awful either and it's also not the main focus in comparison to say Sleeping Dogs. I just find saying that all of a sudden compared to other open world games the controls are 'poor' to be wrong. I don't think any open world game is perfect in all areas, and neither is GTA V, but I don't feel it's completely lagging behind other open world games either.
Yeah I don't mind the actual plane controls but I wish they would patch out that turbulence. The very first time I got into a plane in this game was on a mission and at the end it told me to land it which made me actually say "oh no" out loud. I'm an awful flyer and an even worse lander of planes in video games but I actually did it on my first try and it looked amazingly smooth, no bouncing off the runway or anything. It's got pretty smooth controls.
Yeah I forgot about the drive by shootings, they are indeed awful in this. The melee issue like I said is a difference in design. Sleeping Dogs was created at its core as a melee focused game with a combo system and all that stuff. Guns were an afterthought in that game until the 70% mark of the story and when they did show up it was pretty janky. It's the total opposite in GTA, that's a gun focused game with melee as an afterthought.
The missions are pretty scripted so far but they're at least diverse and multi-layered in many cases. It's not like 4 where you would just drive to a spot and shoot 40 guys and bam mission done. I only have like 21/69 done though so I've got a lot left there.
You could just not do it when you flip your car. Just get out of it like you would in any other GTA.
HawksWinStanley
Member
Really? I haven't noticed any at all. Just stuff way way off in the distance as I approach it while driving but I'm pretty sure that's normal.
So if I don't say something is bad I'm ignoring it? Not sure if I'm reading this right. What if I don't think the controls are bad...?
I've played those other games you mentioned and still find everything you listed to be far superior in GTA V (except for shooting from cars). It's not about ignoring anything, it's simply a difference of opinion.
TheSpaceBetween
Member
I'm not. Not that it isn't well made. But GTA continues to prove it is just not for me.
Woah, calm down. Improper word usage, no need to be aggressive.
I've heard this a couple times regarding Sleeping Dogs' shooting and I honestly don't get it. Sure the enemy reactions are shit compared to GTA just like they are in Just Cause 2 and the Saint's Row games. But one thing with all of those games I never had a problem with was hitting what the fuck I aimed at without the need for lock-on. Something just feels off with the GTA games since I've never been able to play those games like any other third person shooter, open world or otherwise and have to rely on lock on to not get slaughtered during missions.
For a game that focused mainly on melee, the shooting in Sleeping Dogs was still superior to GTAIV and from most impressions GTAV too. Now if any of the other open world games had GTA's budget then maybe the hit reactions and enemy physics would be on par with GTA but if I had to choose, I would take the functioning free aim shooting of those other games compared to GTA's world class enemy reactions that I have to resort to lock-on shooting to enjoy.
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
There is a lot of truth here. This game gets a total pass for some basic broken things.
You don't need lockon for GTA V, I played the whole game in Free Aim just fine and had a great time. I thought IV's shooting was absolutely awful as well and used lockon whilst playing it.
I'm glad to hear this. That was one of my biggest gripes with IV, and the main reason the Episodes were much more fun.
So the traction control on the cars is a bit shit. I do wish you would get paid even a small amount for some of these side missions, I get that they want you wait for big scores, but doing work for free is stupid.
I do love the ambience in the desert, though I wish it was a bigger area.
LOL So hyperbole from reviews and masses of marketing had no influence, he is just a sucker if he fell for the lies? Gold.
I do love the ambience in the desert, though I wish it was a bigger area.
Using reviews as a metric for saying the hardcore GTA fans are happy with the controls is not real useful. As you say, people buy it in spite of the controls, even the most ardent fan will usually admit the controls are broken in small ways. It's pure bloody mindedness by R* at this point.
LOL So hyperbole from reviews and masses of marketing had no influence, he is just a sucker if he fell for the lies? Gold.
That's good to hear. I'll definitely be trying free aim when I get the PC version later. Have they fixed the issue with the game shitting the bed causing your character to freak out and flail around trying to gun butt an enemy that gets too close instead of shooting them in the face? It would be really nice if Rockstar included the close quarters kills from RDR as that would alleviate what is most likely an issue with the Euphoria physics engine.
Sure it does. The things you said were objectively false. The games today don't play like the games then and there are clear differences in multiple aspects of it's production; there's absolutely no way for you to quantify and thus prove that a majority thinks this is the best game in the series (pretty sure nothing close to a majority has even completed the game even, to make an educated opinion about it one way or the other); and there's nothing that says a majority can't be wrong (compounding your flawed premise with another); and even if they did, there were as many people saying - during the week 1 release window - the same thing about GTA4, that it was the best game in the series, this is what GTA is all about!
Spine_Ripper
Member
Somebody mentioned this earlier, but...has ANYBODY heard the song Regulate by Warren G just ONCE in this game?!?
It's my most listened to radio station across all 3 characters and after putting in 35 hours, I can't recall hearing it once
It's my most listened to radio station across all 3 characters and after putting in 35 hours, I can't recall hearing it once
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
I finished a mission with Trevor once out in the wilderness. And while the mission stats screen was up there doing it's thing, and before I could get rid of it, a cougar appeared and killed me.
Somebody mentioned this earlier, but...has ANYBODY heard the song Regulate by Warren G just ONCE in this game?!?
It's my most listened to radio station across all 3 characters and after putting in 35 hours, I can't recall hearing it once
Sure haven't. Some songs seem to get a lot of play and some songs seem to get very little. It's kind of been this way since the music went random in SA. It's not nearly as bad in 5 as it was in 4 though.
I tended to not let enemies get close but the few that did I was able to just smack with melee no problem. The melee isn't 'fantastic' though so I never really relied on it, I tend to keep my distance. I agree with what you said though, I'd love RDR or MP3's up close melee kills and was surprised something along those lines wasn't included.
My niggles with GTA Vs combat don't really relate to the character movement/shooting itself but more that I feel the game forces the player to use cover far too much by making them quite fragile, especially in comparison to IV. Armour does improve things a bit but it could be better tbh. Running and gunning is fun but you need to shoot to make the aiming reticule appear on screen, I'd love an option to have the aiming reticule on screen all the time.
On PC I can see it being even better though, I think a higher framerate and mouse/kb control could make a great difference, just like it did when going from MP3 console to MP3 PC (and I'll be buying GTA V on PC when it eventually comes out)
mickcenary
Member
This is the most accurate appraisal of the game I will probably ever read.
The game is largely a shooter and the core mechanics concerned with shooting things - movement included, as you can't successfully have one without the other - simply aren't that great. And they're incredibly dated. This in itself makes any 10/10 score kinda ridiculous. I mean, imagine if Gran Turismo had mediocre driving mechanics? Would we slap a big 10 on it purely because of the plethora of cars/tracks and wonderfully detailed models? No, we would not.
Rockstar needed to go deeper. They needed to scrap a whole lot of shit and rework things from the ground up. Instead, they settled for the slight refinement of an already janky-as-anything shooting/movement model. All this leads me to believe is that they're just not cut-out for the TPS game; and they've had more than enough attempts to prove otherwise.
I'm not saying the mechanics are god-awful, but when they constitute such a large part of the game, it just seems as if the necessary and relevant critique gets lost in the sea of 'look at all this bullet-point shit you can do; and the awesome writing/characters and the rich, vibrant city', which all have merit and are excellent in GTA games, but they should not permit such a blind eye to be turned, or for standards to fly out the window.
It just seems like a massive copout that no other game is subjected to; not to the same extent, anyway. The game certainly isn't bad, but it is not 'universal 10/10s' good where it matters.
Max Payne 3 is one of the best TPS this gen so Rockstar can do shooters perfectly well. Also, maybe the people giving the game 10/10 didn't really have control issues either ? I know the GTA games especially are prone to hyperbole and I'm not a huge fan of the gaming press either, but if someone like me who wasn't a big fan of the controls in the majority of Rockstars RAGE engine games really enjoyed the mechanics of GTA V maybe they enjoyed them too ?
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Performance? I was gonna write a long ass post
But I keep it short, anybody that crys "framerate" or "its unplayable because of the performance" are talkin nonsense, GTAV may not run at 60fps or be locked at 30fps but any dips it does have are mostly unnoticeable. Same with everyother game in the past....except for AC1 and SH:HD Collection.
One thing I not happy with is you can't(I haven't yet anyway) buy new homes.
Net_Wrecker
Member
These are the same reviewers who gave Uncharted 3 a 10/10 and mentioned not a word of the screwed up aiming. I, personally, don't trust any impressions before I get my hands on games. Tons of people said word for word "GTAV feels like Max Payne 3" but it doesn't. Anyone who put a decent amount of time into MP3 and jumps into a gunplay heavy mission in GTAV should be able to feel the difference. The next response will be "Oh, but GTA isn't a pure shooter." That's a poor excuse. 90% of your interactions with enemies will be by shooting a gun at them. I'm not asking for shootdodging or even bullet time for every character, but the base level mechanics should not still be this stilted, slow, and awkward.
Some of you don't have an issue with combat controls. Fine, okay. Some people still don't have an issue with GTAIV either, but that game felt lumbering, dated, and, at times, flat out broken from day 1. Different people have different levels of what they're willing to accept. GTAV's combat doesn't feel horrible like GTAIV's did, but it's still lagging behind other aspects of the game, and that's disappointing.
That's fair enough and I can completely understand the mistrust of reviewers as well (I was another one who hated Uncharted 3's aiming before the patch, well I hated the game anyway
).I certainly wouldn't say GTA Vs gunplay is like Max Payne 3, it's not and I do wish it was, but I don't feel it's that stilted or awkward either. With GTA IV I felt like I was being actively fought against, it was in general very awkward and more of an inconvenience. I've honestly had no problems at all with movement and reacting in combat situations. I know I'm only speaking for myself, of course I am and I'm not saying you or anyone else is wrong with their opinion, just that I'm surprised people are finding it so awkward. I certainly have my combat complaints, to say it's perfect would be nonsense, but I found it such a big leap as to be very enjoyable. It's why I'm actually so interested in GTA Online. I couldn't get on with GTA 4/Read Dead Redemption's multiplayer at all and found the controls far too clunky for my liking in a multi setting.
TheLegendary
Member
I dont really like the radio stations
Net_Wrecker
Member
I spent a ton of time with GTAIV, RDR, and a decent amount with MP3, and IDK, to call GTAV a "big leap" from RDR would be pushing it IMO. The cover system still feels as wonky and magnetic as GTAIV, the sound is worse than RDR, limb specific damage is gone, the hit reactions are less pronounced, the locomotion is worse than MP3, they still make you walk in combat if you don't shoot for like 3 seconds, the physics system is still too punishing when you fall, etc. It's a good step up from GTAIV, but it's still not great. I could let it slide if it wasn't such a major part of the game.
I think it is the only near universal complaint.
Are you people bothering with free aim or just using lock-on? Free aim is just an annoyance in this game, and lock-on makes "shooting" an afterthought. The shootouts seem designed around lock on, and they're terrible anyway. I really don't know how you would complete some Rampage missions just with free aim. There's a middle option but I didn't see the difference between it and lock-on. I think this the single most disappointing thing about the game, this is a third-person shooter with mediocre shooting. Quite literally these are PS2 standards of TPS.
To be fair, we're talking about shooters on dual analog here. You're always just going to be dealing with different forms of shit to fight through.
GTA V on PC with kb/m will suddenly control a million times better with nothing else having changed, much like GTA IV did before it, and much like everything involving precise and quick aiming in a 3D space does.
Net_Wrecker
Member
Max Payne 3 was pinpoint accurate. Quite possibly the most accurate 3rd person shooter I've ever felt on a console. I'm sorry, but there's no excuse. It's all under the same Rockstar umbrella and I don't think it's unfair to hold them to their own standards. MP3 fixed so many of the problems that was plaguing their combat for 2 generations. So much of GTAV is of the highest quality in the genre, but controls and combat has to be called out, among other issues like the garage/impound system, and the (IMO) pointless stock system and mishandling of funds within the game in general.
I finished all the rampages with Free Aim. I can't play with lock-on. As annoying as some of the lingering issues are with the combat, lock-on makes the kills feel so much less satisfying, as it did in MP3.
Yeah I mean a huge step up from GTA IV though I do believe it's an improvement over RDR as well. My only complaint with the sound would be it's a bit too low but apart from that I don't think it's worse than RDR at all. I like the sound of the weapons a lot. I do agree that you should be able to run during combat, hell I'd like to say the running/sprinting should be faster in general. Had no problems with the cover either. The hit reactions are less pronounced and I do wish they were like Max Payne 3 but I feel that's probably due to being an open world game in comparison to Max Payne 3's linear levels where they just can't have the same level of detail due to the open world nature. I'd still say the combat's pretty good overall.
Funnily enough I was never entirely happy with the console controls with Max Payne 3. The aiming wasn't fast enough for my liking (on Free Aim) and I never felt completely comfortable with it. This was on 360 though I am toying with the notion of getting the PS3 version cheap as a comparison with GTA 5. I do feel GTA V's movement is tighter than MP3's though but I wouldn't say that as a definite as I'm going from memory here. Personally I consider Max Payne 3 on PC as basically the best Rockstar RAGE engine game in terms of control and movement (and one of the best shooters as well). It really shines on PC.
It'll be up to another open world developer to top them first before any kind of pressure can be applied. There's games that do have a mechanic or two that's better than GTA but they can't pull off an actual open world, or have fun diverse content, or have missions that aren't MMO caliber. They can't even do the cinematic stuff as good. What good are great mechanics when there's no interesting game behind it?
jhferry said:
The last time they went back to basics we ended up with GTA IV and most do not want a repeat of that situation. Vice City does not hold up well at all besides the soundtrack. But the gameplay is extremely basic now. No one cares about the story either in an open world game, it's the gameplay and diversity that will make these games live or die.
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
Honestly, I think maybe the series is off track a bit. What was the original draw of the series? Freedom, narrative, shock value?
The effort to make the worlds bigger and bigger with more side things to do could be the issue here. I think this is the reason some are mixed on San Andreas, this is where this started. Rockstar maybe should consider a smaller setting, Vice City or something next gen would be awesome. A single strong lead with a gradual buildup to a great ending. Get back to basics on the controls and the narrative. Who cares how big the map is when half of it is mountains? Get back to the quests building the narrative. In GTAV it's like you are just going through the motions.
The effort to make the worlds bigger and bigger with more side things to do could be the issue here. I think this is the reason some are mixed on San Andreas, this is where this started. Rockstar maybe should consider a smaller setting, Vice City or something next gen would be awesome. A single strong lead with a gradual buildup to a great ending. Get back to basics on the controls and the narrative. Who cares how big the map is when half of it is mountains? Get back to the quests building the narrative. In GTAV it's like you are just going through the motions.
That's the problem, all the devs with great gameplay don't have the resources to compete with the world building. R* is too stubborn to include great gameplay and want to stick to their system. I could forgive them during the 3/VC days, but so many better control schemes and concepts have come around since then that it just feels like they are missing the point a bit.
I beat MP3 on PS3 on Hard, and I played that one on Free Aim as well, and I honestly don't notice an enormous difference between the two in terms of how they handle at their core.
MP3 just makes things generally more manageable through its quickly-replenishing slow-mo mechanic (which they try to mimic in GTAV to a limited extent) and the fact that, as a far more linear game, enemies are almost always sitting in front of you. But I don't know that its core shooting/aiming mechanics are really all that different, with both games handling those aspects similarly and featuring damaging hitscan enemies. And as far as movement, I recall a lot of people getting upset about Max Payne's weighty and fairly cumbersome movement in that game.
GTAV as an open world game just generally has enemies pouring all around you, and with the limited health regen and dynamic cover, that can make things more difficult. But these are more broad gameplay differences rather than cutting to the core in terms of how both handle aiming and shooting. In both games on dual analog, I can hit headshots at a similar clip and hit percentage.
No. It's bad and very hard to hit anything.
Free aim the entire game. Like I said earlier, feels fine to me (except when in a car, that's much more difficult).
This is pure BS. There are many third person shooters that play great with a controller, GTA4 still played like ass with kbm.
I don't think it's just a resource problem. I'm 100% convinced you could give the Saints Row guys 4 years and $300 million and they would still churn out a game that has ridiculously awful and basic missions and a city that would likely be a lot better than the one in SR3/4 but would still pale in comparison to what Rockstar can do. Even with as much as I hate IV the actual world was still better and felt more alive then any other open world game this generation (until 5 anyway).
It's kind of like how Naughty Dog are masters of the cinematic story telling method even though their budgets are fairly run of the mill for that kind of game. You need talent and focus as well as the resources to pull the vision off.
Maybe not Volition as they stand, but give them 300 million and they can hire a lot of people in the areas where they are weak. Any dev with 300 million and decent management should be able to hire the expertise they are lacking.
Movement is and has always been wonky in GTA games, but what problems did you have with the aiming in GTA IV with m/kb? I originally played GTA IV on console then again on PC and the difference was, as it has always been, enormous.
The fact that need solutions like hard-locking and aim assist are included (which they also had in Max Payne 3) should be rather enough to show that the dual analog system is ineffective.
CraZed
Member
I haven't purchased it. I am currently playing Puppeteer in lieu of purchasing GTA V just before I put my PS3 up for sale to offset the cost of my PS4. Also, I am hopeful it will be out on PS4 at a later date and if that does not come to fruition there WILL be a PC version.
I almost broke down and got it when I was trolling through Wal-Mart for some socks but I kept on rolling past it and Disney Infinity lol.
I almost broke down and got it when I was trolling through Wal-Mart for some socks but I kept on rolling past it and Disney Infinity lol.
Yeah most console games have aim assist but without lock-on I was still able to play through games like Just Cause 2, Saint's Row, and Sleeping Dogs with no problem hitting my intended targets. In all of the GTA games this gen, I've tried free aim and just got frustrated because something was off and the shooting didn't feel right which resulted in me getting my ass shot to pieces and switching right back to the lock-on system. I'm pretty terrible with M&KB and had no problem completing Max Payne 3 as well as all the other open world and third person shooters I've played without issue. The GTA games and RDR are the only games where I need that lock-on crutch because the base shooting mechanics aren't up to par in my opinion.
Similar threads
- Poll