Current Events > San Andreas >>> GTA V

(+) Yeah! (+)

fact
---

I agree.
---

Damn_Underscore posted...

fact

Go_Totodile posted...

I agree.

---

nah.
---

Id also like to say SA > V > IV
---

SA is a good game, but nah
---

VC > GTA3 > GTA V > SA > IV
---

How come vice city and san andreas weren't numbered?
---

lolno

Anyone who thinks any of the PS2 games are better than V just have their nostalgia goggles on too tight.
---

3khc posted...

How come vice city and san andreas weren't numbered?

Because you touch yourself at night.
---

3khc posted...

How come vice city and san andreas weren't numbered?

GTA does this thing where if it's built on the same engine as a numbered entry, it doesn't get a number.

GTA 3, Vice City, and San Andreas are all built on the same engine.
Same with GTA 1 and it's London entries.
Same with GTA 4 and it's "expansion packs"
---

I think you could make the argument based on when each game was released and how much of a step forward they were for the series. SA did a lot of great things with the GTA formula.

But as a direct comparison, GTA V does almost everything better. Better shooting, better driving, better story, better world. SA had more memorable characters, but the story was a total mess
---

I thought this was common knowledge?
---

eston posted...

GTA V does almost everything better. Better shooting, better driving, better story, better world.

Gonna have to disagree with that one.
---

YourDrunkFather posted...

Damn_Underscore posted...

fact

Go_Totodile posted...

I agree.

---

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

YourDrunkFather posted...

Damn_Underscore posted...

fact

Go_Totodile posted...

I agree.

---

YourDrunkFather posted...

Damn_Underscore posted...

fact

Go_Totodile posted...

I agree.

---

Capn Circus posted...

GTA V > VC > SA > GTA 3 > IV

---

I dunno why some people like to treat SA and the older PS2 games like theyre unplayable nostalgia garbage. Theyre really not. SA was even the pinnacle of the era.

The map was massive, it still feels like the biggest map to me. Definitely the most varied with the most things to do. Controls and gun play I never had any issues with so I dont understand those complaints. The driving is the arcadey style which I vastly prefer to the realistic styles of IV and V.

Also there was certainly some odd glitchy moments but tbh they were never a hindrance or game breaking. The wacky ness of it all just made it that much more fun. I also think the stats were handled better (for the most part) in SA. And I like how PS2 characters could actually stand a few bullets before needing to take cover or search for health packs.

Idk, I dont think these games are as horrid as some try to make them out to be.
---

Go_Totodile posted...

I dunno why some people like to treat SA and the older PS2 games like theyre unplayable nostalgia garbage. Theyre really not. SA was even the pinnacle of the era.

The map was massive, it still feels like the biggest map to me. Definitely the most varied with the most things to do. Controls and gun play I never had any issues with so I dont understand those complaints. The driving is the arcadey style which I vastly prefer to the realistic styles of IV and V.

Also there was certainly some odd glitchy moments but tbh they were never a hindrance or game breaking. The wacky ness of it all just made it that much more fun. I also think the stats were handled better (for the most part) in SA. And I like how PS2 characters could actually stand a few bullets before needing to take cover or search for health packs.

Idk, I dont think these games are as horrid as some try to make them out to be.

But are they legit better than the new games? I doubt that.
---

UncleBourbon33 posted...

Go_Totodile posted...

I dunno why some people like to treat SA and the older PS2 games like theyre unplayable nostalgia garbage. Theyre really not. SA was even the pinnacle of the era.

The map was massive, it still feels like the biggest map to me. Definitely the most varied with the most things to do. Controls and gun play I never had any issues with so I dont understand those complaints. The driving is the arcadey style which I vastly prefer to the realistic styles of IV and V.

Also there was certainly some odd glitchy moments but tbh they were never a hindrance or game breaking. The wacky ness of it all just made it that much more fun. I also think the stats were handled better (for the most part) in SA. And I like how PS2 characters could actually stand a few bullets before needing to take cover or search for health packs.

Idk, I dont think these games are as horrid as some try to make them out to be.

But are they legit better than the new games? I doubt that.

Yes, I think so.
---

SlashmanSG posted...

eston posted...

GTA V does almost everything better. Better shooting, better driving, better story, better world.

Gonna have to disagree with that one.

Feel free, but SA's story was pretty bad
---

Go_Totodile posted...

I dunno why some people like to treat SA and the older PS2 games like theyre unplayable nostalgia garbage. Theyre really not. SA was even the pinnacle of the era.

No, they're not unplayable garbage. But they're nowhere near as good as V. GTA3 might have been the most groundbreaking and influential, but I would say GTAV is pretty much the series' high point right now. Four-Five years later and the game is still selling mass copies. It's crazy.
---

Kitt posted...

Go_Totodile posted...

I dunno why some people like to treat SA and the older PS2 games like theyre unplayable nostalgia garbage. Theyre really not. SA was even the pinnacle of the era.

No, they're not unplayable garbage. But they're nowhere near as good as V. GTA3 might have been the most groundbreaking and influential, but I would say GTAV is pretty much the series' high point right now. Four-Five years later and the game is still selling mass copies. It's crazy.

I mean yeah Id be a fool to deny all the advancements V has made, but it doesnt really have as much pull or fun as SA does.
---

eston posted...

SlashmanSG posted...

eston posted...

GTA V does almost everything better. Better shooting, better driving, better story, better world.

Gonna have to disagree with that one.

Feel free, but SA's story was pretty bad

It was a hell of a lot better than V's. V was boring as fuck.
---

SA was an incredible game for its time.

But that doesn't mean it can compete with such improvements on the formula the future brought. GTA5 is better than SA, just as SA was vastly better than 3 and Vice City. People who claim 3 or Vice City are better than SA are being utterly ridiculous. It's fine if you PREFER one of them, because of their setting, style, music, etc. But that doesn't make them a better game.

SA was such a huge improvement over them it's honestly baffling they all were made in the same console generation.

GTA5 is similarly amazing for its time on top of having two generations of improvement over SA. There's not really a contest.
---

SlashmanSG posted...

eston posted...

SlashmanSG posted...

eston posted...

GTA V does almost everything better. Better shooting, better driving, better story, better world.

Gonna have to disagree with that one.

Feel free, but SA's story was pretty bad

It was a hell of a lot better than V's. V was boring as fuck.

V at least had a cohesive story, and I did not find it boring. SA was all over the place
---

YourDrunkFather posted...

Damn_Underscore posted...

fact

Go_Totodile posted...

I agree.

---

5 is a better game but nothing will match the feeling of venturing out into the world on your own in SA for the first time.

Only other time I felt that sense of " what will happen out here next" was RDR.
---

5 is objectively superior in all aspects.
SA is still lots of fun though.
---

Wolf_J_Flywheel posted...

5 is a better game but nothing will match the feeling of venturing out into the world on your own in SA for the first time.

Only other time I felt that sense of " what will happen out here next" was RDR.

I agree, that part where you have to leave Los Santos and end up out in the country with Catalina really made the overall scope of the game feel huge.
---

And if you had played 5 first instead back then imagine how that would have felt. >_>
---

SlashmanSG posted...

eston posted...

GTA V does almost everything better. Better shooting, better driving, better story, better world.

Gonna have to disagree with that one.

Tmk posted...

And if you had played 5 first instead back then imagine how that would have felt. >_>

I don't want to be a negative nancy, but man I just don't think V's map is as good as SA. It feels so much more empty and boring compared to SA's.
---

I'm pretty sure SA's actually has a lot more empty space, and also didn't have the benefit of being riddled with random encounter/radiant events/whatever they're called.

Which is pretty nuts when you consider how much bigger 5's map is.
---

YourDrunkFather posted...

Damn_Underscore posted...

fact

Go_Totodile posted...

I agree.

---

Tmk posted...

I'm pretty sure SA's actually has a lot more empty space, and also didn't have the benefit of being riddled with random encounter/radiant events/whatever they're called.

Which is pretty nuts when you consider how much bigger 5's map is.

The keyword I attempted to emphasize is it feels more empty than SA's. SA has all the variety and the insane wacky pedestrians and pilots crashing and all that. Of course V is the bigger map, but it really doesn't feel like it.
---

V is a one and done game for me.
---

And what I was getting at earlier is does it feel that way because of nostalgia? Because I suspect it does. When SA came out, it was very amazing. Nothing had managed anything like that before. Whereas GTA5, while also incredible at what it does, is basically "That again but bigger and better" which is not as impressive by itself, even if technically far superior.

Like I said, GTA3/Vice City, compared to SA, is bizarre. SA legit seems like a next-gen game in comparison. So SA had a huge wow factor.

Though on the other hand GTA5 is apparently one of the most successful...things, ever, so I guess it has a lot of wow going for it too. Shame Rockstar set out to ruin it with GTAO. >_>
---

The only reason SA's map feels big at all is because the roads are set up like Disney lines and it artificially lengthens the amount of time it takes to get from point A to point B. It was a clever design trick 20 years ago, but since games actually do have huge maps now it feels incredibly tedious in comparison
---

GTA V is a fucking gem.
---

I actually find IV and V's maps tedious to traverse. I always enjoyed driving around SA.
---