I had prepared myself to experience the world's best game. Judging by other people's reviews, Grand Theft Auto 4 was crafted in a special gaming studio in heaven, authored by Jesus Christ himself, and it descended upon us from the heavens on a golden chariot made out of chocolate covered in fairy dust. Imagine my surprise when I experienced the world's biggest turd in gaming since Davilex' A2 Racer (Dutch people will understand).
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-24
Member since:2008-07-15
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-24
Right. Wouldn't want to upset the Jesux zealots. :-P
http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Node/4081/
Edited 2009-03-28 19:30 UTC
Member since:1997-10-01
I can't help but comment on this off-topic comments. Actually, I wouldn't count Stalinism as atheism, as it drew its power from a religious-like devotion to an "inevitable" victory of "the working class" over their "oppressors." The reason that people didn't wake up en masse and revolt against their "worker's revolution" becoming the oppressor and the party leadership having set themselves up as a new aristocracy is because of all the religious indoctrination they were subject to and the faith that they had in their eventual liberation as the invisible hand of class struggle took them into a glorious future wherein no government would be necessary.
Member since:2005-11-14
Could it be that the figurehead of what is historically one of the world's most violent religions is losing his edge? :-) "
What purpose, other than to try to start a flame war, does your post serve?
For the record, Christianity doesn't teach its followers to be violent. It's human stupidity and greed that perverted teachings of a religion that permeate violence. Try reading the Bible some time so you'll actually know what you're talking about.
Member since:2005-12-02
For the record, ever hear of some small historical events such as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition? I would say regardless of what a book says, the actions of the religions followers are what determine it's teachings.
Member since:2005-11-14
For the record, ever hear of some small historical events such as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition? I would say regardless of what a book says, the actions of the religions followers are what determine it's teachings. "
Quick, look up really fast....ah, too late. The point clearly went over your head.
Member since:2005-12-02
You had no point except to attempt to spread your beliefs, and force them onto others. Thanks for playing
As to another post, the New Testament does not over ride the Old Testament. They are part of the same book, one before the birth of JC, the second part after. It is a history book that has been (mis)-interpreted too many times in being translated from the original work.
Member since:2005-11-14
You had no point except to attempt to spread your beliefs, and force them onto others. Thanks for playing
As to another post, the New Testament does not over ride the Old Testament. They are part of the same book, one before the birth of JC, the second part after. It is a history book that has been (mis)-interpreted too many times in being translated from the original work. "
My point was simple, you just refused to acknowledge it. Humans can pervert any teachings to mean whatever they want it to mean. That point was made very clearly in my post, which you either ignored, or was outside your ability to understand. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you just ignored it, because it went against your beliefs. However, you're being intellectual dishonest with yourself to cite the Crusades (something that was against the teachings of the Bible).
To illustrate your point in a different context, let's say you're studying up on C#, you write an application, and it fails to compile due to errors in your code. Your stance is that is the errors in your code is what you were taught to do, although the textbook that you were studying from clearly says otherwise.
The Bible is a collection of books, not just one book. I agree that there are parts that are mistranslated, which is why you must interpret the teachings in it's entirety, not just by one singular verse from a book in the Bible.
Member since:2005-07-24
Once society has said that it's OK to believe irrational things... no evidence required, then there is no limit to the severity of the ensuing abuse. That is the ultimate problem with the insanity that is religion. And that is why it ends up doing so much more harm than good in the world. And that is why its best to discourage it, in favor of rational thought.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2005-11-14
Once society has said that it's OK to believe irrational things... no evidence required, then there is no limit to the severity of the ensuing abuse. That is the ultimate problem with the insanity that is religion. And that is why it ends up doing so much more harm than good in the world. And that is why its best to discourage it, in favor of rational thought. "
Using your argument and viewpoint - is it insane to believe all of life occurred naturally (abiogensis)? Abiogensis has not been proven, yet, you may have "faith" in science that it must be how it occurred without irrefutable evidence.
Member since:2005-07-24
Humor, for those who are not overly-sensitive?
For the record, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Actions... and history... speak louder than words.
Been there. Done that. The Old Testament is grisly reading, indeed. Stephen King's most horrifying passages seem like Doctor Seuss, by comparison. But Stephen King's followers make no claims as to the events he describes being true.
Edited 2009-03-30 14:48 UTC
Member since:2005-11-14
Humor, for those who are not overly-sensitive?
For the record, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Actions... and history... speak louder than words.
Been there. Done that. The Old Testament is grisly reading, indeed. Stephen King's most horrifying passages seem like Doctor Seuss, by comparison. But Stephen King's followers make no claims as to the events he describes being true. "
If you read the Bible, then you'd know that the teachings of the New Testament override those of the Old Testament. Spread your FUD elsewhere.
Member since:2005-07-24
Member since:2005-08-18
Member since:
2006-01-25
But while annoying, it`s still a fun game. Thom, you can`t be serious thinking this is the worst game you ever played. You got your expectations too high, but GTA IV is still one of the most finely crafted labour of love games around. Just the sheer amount of thought and work put into it by devs deserves some praise. I couldn`t care less about the character, that is right.
Edited 2009-03-28 14:27 UTC
Member since:2005-06-29
...it's just that the thought and work have gone into the wrong aspects of the game - realism and graphics, while completely ignoring everything else.
Games like Saints Row 2 and Left 4 Dead are a lot cruder and less realistic, but they shine where matters: gameplay. I want my gaming experience to be a fun one. That's why I play games: to have fun.
As such an overly hyped and praised game, I expected GTA4 to be fun, while it simply wasn't. It's dreadful.
Edited 2009-03-28 14:52 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
Games like Saints Row 2 and Left 4 Dead are a lot cruder and less realistic, but they shine where matters: gameplay. I want my gaming experience to be a fun one. That's why I play games: to have fun.
As such an overly hyped and praised game, I expected GTA4 to be fun, while it simply wasn't. It's dreadful.
The problem with this argument is that it can be used against you and be just as valid. People gave the game great reviews because they had a lot of fun playing it. And you can't argue against that because fun is subjective.
Edited 2009-03-28 17:21 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
i have to agree with him, GTA4 is the most overrated game i have ever seen.
I tried it on PS3 and 360.
You just go around kicking and running.
I don't think it is the worst game ever, there are much worst, but it is on the top half of my list.
If you want to play one of the best game ever, buy a PS3 and play Metal Gear Solid 4.
Member since:
2005-09-21
And here's the mini-review of the PC version, which is every bit as bad as the XBox version, but made infinitely worse by a port seems to have been done by an intern after a particularly bad night of drinking.
When I purchased this game on my new computer (Quad core, 4 gigs ram, Radeon 4850), it essentially didn't run at all. First I had to sign up for two extra accounts (rockstar has their own network, and then windows live) and then it takes about 3 minutes to load.
Not that loading was actually a good thing, because after about 2 minutes of playing the game, textures started randomly disappearing and flickering, getting worse and worse until I was walking in mid air along with a couple cars. I did actually play through this for a while because I have such good memories of playing previous GTA games. The issues was eventually sort of fixed in a patch, although the game still stutters and sometimes loses textures. I don't think it looks that great to justify the staggering system requirements.
Then the half-assed port is really obvious in the fact that you can't actually look up controls. In the control configuration, all you get is an option to set up an XBox controller. On a PC???? WTF.
I'm surprised that you didn't spend more time complaining about the cars. They're actually my biggest issue with the game. You spend so much time having to get to places, but the cars are completely broken. And they're not even realistic! Realism would be a blessing here because real cars handle much better than cars in GTA.
Driving an SUV in GTA is completely impossible because the body roll at speeds higher than 30km/h will cause you to flip over. Any regular car can roll down a hill at about 30-50km/h, and when you hit the e-brake will actually do a 180. Turning a corner without hitting a building at high speed is completely impossible. Normal cars have artificially low top speeds. Real cars can all top 150km/h now, but in GTA some of them top out at what feels like 80 or less.
All the fun with hitting jumps is gone. You can't drive up stairs, and hitting them with a motorbike, will cause you to go flying off the bike. I could go on, but it just sucks so badly.
Member since:
2008-09-21
Actually I would say the story is more about someone hell bent on revenge due to the experience of a traitor during the war.
The graphics are great. I experienced NONE of the darkness problems that you describe though I played / am playing on the PS3.
The physics for the vehicles is great.
The attention to detail is astounding, like getting in certain makes of car and the there is SAT NAV. The radio chatter. The textures used to give a really diverse looking city with many differnt shop fronts etc. The fact you can hear people on mobile phones in conversation as you walk past.
I agree the constant phone calls for meeting up with people is really annoying, but I would say the game is great despite it.
I personally think the story is great though I haven't completed it yet.
The game is vast with the usual sub-games, a huge city with plenty to explore and do. There is so many missions it's just great value for money and will keep you going for a long time.
I can understand someone finding it over-hyped and not delivering on expectations but describing it as one of the worst games you have ever played is laughable, unless you really haven't tried many games.
Edited 2009-03-28 15:14 UTC
Member since:
2007-09-25
"I guess the people handing out the praise (basically every game reviewer) have never played Mass Effect, which sports the best dialogue and story of any game ever made."
I stopped paying attention to the review at this point. Seriously, that's one of the most baldly idiotic statements I've read in quite a while. Even if you do like Mass Effect, saying that its cliched plot and flatline dialogue are the "best of any game ever made" are a sure indication that the reviewer hasn't played very many games at all.
GTA 4 does leave a lot to be desired, but then so does this review.
Member since:2005-06-29
Yeah, why don't you just quote the entire paragraph, making it clear that it's more than just the dialogue and the story that make Mass Effect stand out so much here:
Edited 2009-03-28 15:45 UTC
Member since:2005-07-01
Mass Effect's plot may be epic but I'm more impressed by a small story, set in the real world than all that derivative, Star Trek stuff.
There are very few real world stories in video games. R* may make a nonsense of them with their lovable psychopath dichotomy and their body count but at least they're trying.
I thought the relationship between Nico and his cousin was actually pretty well realised - one of the most convincing relationships I've encountered in a game and that is something that seriously needs commending.
You're complaints were mostly pretty valid but it's unfair to ignore the game's qualities. The recreation of a contemporary American city has to be the best in video game history. Oh yeah, and multiplayer deathmatch rules. Seriously. Having both guns and cars as weapons and not having to aim makes for a surprisingly strategic shooter.
I think many of the game's failings derive from the fact the GTA games sell very well, so they don't like to change much (this game is nothing like as different from previous games as people make out). But, hopefully, the law of diminishing may finally be kicking in, even if the gaming world hasn't got the message from this and The Sims that people would like some games set in a real world that they can relate to.
BTW, you forgot to mention that the over-the-shoulder camera used in combat is complete rubbish.
Member since:
2008-06-03
Member since:
2008-05-16
Member since:
2006-01-18
Member since:
2006-01-23
I really enjoyed the first GTA, it was more of a pick up and play game back when we couldn't have 'good' graphics and effort was put into the fun aspect of game play. Something that is lacking in most modern games these days unfortunately.
I've given up on the GTA games now, its the same-old game repeated with less game play and seemingly better graphics/world engine, but thats about it.
Fans of GTA may find they prefer something along the same lines, with a bit more 'crazy' aspect to it. They should consider looking to give 'Just Cause' a try.
In saying that, remember its not GTA and you will find faults with Just Cause if you look at it as a clone. However, even on its own merits you'll find problems with that game but it sure is a nice alternative to GTA that provides a nice pick up and play game with some fun injected into it.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/13670.html - review that some may find interesting.
Member since:
2005-07-06
:/
I rather liked Davilex’ M25 Racer, I even still have the CD preview copy (pressed but unlabelled)
It never crashed, it wasn’t insanely hard, you could even see real mapped buildings (it was like a poor mans MSR) in London!
As for GTA4, the only downside I found playing it were the pestering friends, much more tolerable in comparison to GTA: San Andreas’ eat/sleep/training regimen.
Member since:
2005-11-13
Member since:
2005-08-18
I hope it's better than GTA San Andreas. Jesus was that ever an over-rated game. I'm not easily offended and generally think all the hoopla about video game violence is nonsense (I can remember Commando Libya and the outrage it caused) but playing GTA San Andreas was the first time I considered a game morally reprehensible.
Your friends are morons, the main character lacks spine to tell them this and that their plans are moronic and you HAVE to accomplish them on these stupid, violent missions. I dunno, I just don't think willingly participating in drive-by shootings and murdering people for nothing endears myself to the character I'm supposed to root for. Too bad they squandered the angle to seek revenge for your dead mother but maybe that returned later. I never got that far before getting bored with the missions.
Only funny thing was to steal a Harley and drive around randomly. If avoiding the plot is the most fun thing something is really wrong with your game. Oh yeah, and you can get the creepiest lap-dance ever.
Member since:
2005-11-22
A game review just with subjective comments on the FRONT PAGE at OSNEWS?? Come on.. this article is much *overrated*. I think if many people say that it is a fun game, that's not overrated. Rather, the person who say its overrated has a different (minor) taste. Period.
I have tried not to post a comment about a thing for a dozen times. However, I can tell which articles are written/posted by Thom only by reading a sentence or two from the article (or sometimes just by reading the title of the article!), and sadly imo most of them were quite depressing including this one. Please.. Thom.. Please.
Member since:2005-08-18
Member since:2005-11-22
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:
2005-11-13
In a nutshell, this game is ass. Even one of the guys at Giantbomb said, "I love everything about this game, except actually playing it" and they STILL gave it game of the year. WTF?
I remember after playing it for an hour or two, I took this chick out on a date, and was playing this horrifically craptastic bowling mini-game, and then something happened on the way out to the car (think I ran into her or something)... she got spooked and ran away, then I had to do the whole f**king thing all over again.
And it didn't get any better after that. The controls for fighting are sloppy and rather unresponsive, and when you fail a mission because of the shoddy controls, you have to DRIVE to the mission all all over again. I swear, driving to the missions take longer than actually PLAYING them.
I have been told that eventually, you can call a taxi so you don't have to drive anymore, but I never made it that far. I'd rather watch flies f**k than play this game terrible any longer than I did. It was all I could endure. I'd rather play Combat on the Atari 2600. Seriously.
Member since:2005-07-24
Pardon me, as I haven't played this game. But are you talking about something that happened to you in real life, or something that happened in the game?
Edited 2009-03-29 20:16 UTC
Member since:2005-07-22
Member since:
2007-07-11
The game isn't bad. Far from it!
It has its flaws, but nothing like you described - I wonder how you could just play it to the end. When I don't like a game like you didn't like this one, I just give up. And feel sorry for spending 60-70€ on it...
You're a brave guy Thom.
But I love GTA IV. Sorry.
Member since:
2006-11-21
The game has plenty of annoyances, but it is actually FUN. Which is the most important for a game.
Mass effect, which the author gives so much praise to, consisted of 50% procedural content that repeated itself over and over again. The same dungeon, the same space ship, the same base, over and over again with slightly different game text and dialog associated with it. I quite quickly found out that side quests were a complete waste of time in Mass Effect.
Then the dialogue. The acting was solid, but the dialogue content was uninspiring and incredibly tedious. Very little humour or interest was involved.
Anyone that claims that Mass effect has the best story ever made has clearly never played either Baldur's gate or Planescape Torment. So Holwerda goes into the same trap as he claims the GTA reviewers go into. Besides, just because there is a better story around, doesn't mean praise can't be given. This is not a 'winners take all'. Mass effect has a decent story, but you are really drinking the cool aid if you think it is the best ever.
I have absolutely no idea why Holwerda can find Mass Effect fun, while slating GTA IV, when at least GTA IV's side missions has some variety in them and does not reuse the same tiny maps over and over again, with randomised crates to try to fool us into thinking it is somehow different.
I can only think that he wants to slate GTA IV because it is 'the cool thing to do'. Ludicrous review.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2006-11-21
Ah.. and so you attack the convenient parts of my post and ignore the part that actually addresses the story/dialogue part of Mass effect.
Your original argument is basically "GTA IV was given praise for story/dialogue, yet it isn't as good as Mass effect's story/dialog (which is the best ever), therefore it is terrible". This is a lousy line of argument.
Your whole review is pointless from a 'public education' point of view, and you even admit to it yourself. The only reason for this review is thus to make yourself appear superior by slating GTA IV. "I am so much better than everyone else, because I have seen through this product."
I fully respect your opinion, but I wasted a fair bit of time reading this drivel, and will try to remember this before reading another review of yours.
Of course, this post is also pointless from a public education point of view, since people will already have suffered through your review before reading this post.
Member since:
2007-01-03