GTA creator questions Sony

By Ellie Gibson Published 7 September, 2006

And goodness of San Andreas.

Grand Theft Auto creator Dave Jones has revealed he's not convinced Sony has got what it takes to beat Microsoft in the online gaming stakes.

"I seriously question Sony's policy of leaving it down to publishers to come up with their own standards for each [online] game," Jones told Edge magazine.

"I completely disagree with it. I'm not going to put my credit card details with five different companies for some bits of downloadable content. Sony is a huge force, and definitely has been with the PS2 - but now I see it being, at worst, a 50/50 race, but as time goes on I lean more and more towards Microsoft," he continued

Jones is currently working on Crackdown, an Xbox 360 title first announced last year. He hasn't worked on a Grand Theft Auto game since GTA II - so what does he think of the more recent instalments in the series?

"I'd say that, for me, the pinnacle was Vice City. I thought that was absolutely brilliant," Jones said.

"It had perfect timing, perfect music and a perfect level of humour."

But, according to Jones: "Then it lost it with San Andreas, where it went a bit too dark and story-driven." Rockstar take note, when you've finished polishing the diamonds the size of footballs in the box marked SAN ANDREAS PROFITS.

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (83) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • killyourtv #1 6 years ago

    i agree, san andreas wasnt very good

  • CrunchinJelly #2 6 years ago

    Crackdown is looking very, very good, though.

  • Steroyd #3 6 years ago

    Vice City was the best in the series.

    Can't wait for Vice City Stories, it gives you all the abilities of San Andreas plonked on the Vice City map what more could i ask for.

  • Darkedge #4 6 years ago

    Vice City was great - the things that ruined SA were the exercise, eating, and the size made it dull.

    The story was not engaging after you got out of the first section either

  • Mr_Whacker #5 6 years ago

    He's got a point. The lack of managed online stuff is the main drawback for PS3 for me too. In Live everything just works and anything new you get, you know will work the same. Thats massively more important to mainstream takeup than other issues like number of units at launch.

  • Blerk #6 6 years ago

    Online is not the World.

  • JetSetWilly #7 6 years ago

    Online is not the World.

    QFT.

  • SeesThroughAll #8 6 years ago

    I'm not going to put my credit card details with five different companies for some bits of downloadable content.

    No, of course not. Trust Microsoft.

  • smoison #9 6 years ago

    WRONGE

    GTA SAN ANDREASE = BEST GTA YET!

    GTA 1 and 2 were average games, 3 and above were brilliant.
    So basically, he's never worked on the great GTA's....

    Steam, Battle.net, even Gamespy Were all done by FOR FREE on PC and work fine. I'm sure many developers can do it, including Sony.

  • Machiavel #10 6 years ago

    Loved the San Andreas map (Vice city too flat in comparison) - but happily gave up stuck at the flying school (why there's no mission skip cheat, I don't know).

  • dsmx #11 6 years ago

    Without a doubt vice city was the best gta ever simply because there was nothing in it that didn't need to be there, almost every bit of vice city was used for some mission, where as in san andreas 90% of the map was pointless as you never went there.

  • lambtron #12 6 years ago

    @smoison

    Fook me I have never heard anyone claiming GameSpy works properly.

    Made me laugh though.

  • Zomoniac #13 6 years ago

    smoison,

    GTA was glorious, GTA2 was even better, GTA3 was utter shite, GTA:VC was marginally better than 3 and GTA:SA was just irritating, with the ludicrously over-done 'satire' of niggers popping their homies or whatever stopping being entertaining and starting getting annoying after about 30 seconds.

  • Mr_Whacker #14 6 years ago

    No, of course not. Trust Microsoft.

    That's his point though. We don't trust either so lets go with the one that allows you to buy points in stores without a card. Isn't it?

  • Vin #15 6 years ago

    DUM DUM DER DUM DUM DA DA...

    The legend of DAVEY JONES...ARRR

  • getinthereson #16 6 years ago

    smoisone!

    IE can'te believee thate youe thinke thate GTA SAN ANDREASE iss thee beste GTAE gamee. ;)

    No really you are a 15 year old deluded sony fanboy with no respect for videogame heritage.

  • theodg #17 6 years ago

    I think part of the problem with San Andreas, other than its large empty spaces and unengaging charachters, was that it was the third game where very little had changed, so we were basically left doing variations on the same themes that had been introduced two years previously. Add to the that the fact that it was very long and it really starts to drag, definately by the third city.
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 15:19

  • zoidberg #18 6 years ago

    Actually, I like GTA3 better than Vice City or San Andreas, but the passion lies with the first GTA. That was the game deserving of the name: Grand Theft Auto.

  • yonno #19 6 years ago

    so jones hasnt worked on a gta game since it was shit

    hmmm????

  • jack_klugman #20 6 years ago

    GTA3 was utter shite, GTA:VC was marginally better than 3 and GTA:SA was just irritating, with the ludicrously over-done 'satire' of niggers popping their homies or whatever stopping being entertaining and starting getting annoying after about 30 seconds.

    Fortunately, Zomoniac, most of the rest of the game's playing world disagree with you.
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 14:36

  • Les #21 6 years ago

    "so jones hasnt worked on a gta game since it was shit"

    Exactly. But just what you'd expect from an EG headline... It's only because other sites are even worse that I frequent EG (and because the comments section is great fun :) ).
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 14:39

  • X201 #22 6 years ago

    "so jones hasnt worked on a gta game since it was shit "

    It's a well known fact that shit games get loads of money invested in them by publishers. Some shit games like GTA:VC and GTA:SA only get made because they have have a series of shit forefathers to inherit there shitness from.




    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 14:38

  • Zomoniac #23 6 years ago

    theodg: problem is that the mass market couldn't give a toss that it's the same thing. Look how many copies Liberty City Stories has sold, despite to all intents and purposes being the same game as 3 but with a different structure in the box. They don't need to improve the engine because the name guarantees record-breaking sales anyway.

    jack_klugman: when there was no GTA game out last year, most of the game playing world (or the GTA-playing world at least) bought 50 Cent: Bulletproof as an alternative, so you'll forgive me for not taking their opinions too seriously.

  • ccfb #24 6 years ago

    "Online is not the World."

    Context, Englisher. Context.

  • smoison #25 6 years ago

    "when there was no GTA game out last year, most of the game playing world (or the GTA-playing world at least) bought 50 Cent: Bulletproof as an alternative, so you'll forgive me for not taking their opinions too seriously."

    Uhhh Zomoniac, I think you are mistaken. If you notice sales, 50 cents game didn't do very well at all.

    That is because there is no GTA like that comes close to GTA.... Yet

  • Blerk #26 6 years ago

    If you notice sales, 50 cents game didn't do very well at all.

    Actually that's completely untrue. It sold 'gazillions', despite receiving many a critical panning.

  • monkey_man #27 6 years ago

    My favourite GTA game is still GTA3 (did it have a subtitle?). The cars seemed to be more fun to drive, and the environments were full of much more character. San Andreas was so huge that the poor old PS2 couldn't even keep up with generating things in middle-distance, let alone skyscrapers and huge clumps of trees a bit further on. The whole exercise/eat thing was tedious too - it detracted from the fun.

    Oh, and am I the only one that thinks Crackdown looks just a tad...rubbish?

    *runs*
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 14:55

  • groovychainsaw #28 6 years ago

    Weren't sony teaming up with gamespy to provide the service for PS3 anyway?
    /Tries to keep straight face
    /Sniggers

  • kangarootoo #29 6 years ago

    @Les

    From an EG headline?! What are you on about. The headline is absolutely appropriate.

    The guy who created GTA (which he did) questions Sony policy (which he does). You might not like what he had to say, but how did you get to a point where that was EG's fault?

  • Cabelo #30 6 years ago

    I thought GTA was the best in the series to be honest. I thought he did very well with it.

  • Arwin #31 6 years ago

    Yes, it might be good to remember that this guy is now practically working for Microsoft, and no longer with Rockstar ... but ok. ;)

    It would have been nice to know whether this is actually based in any way on fact though. Does he already know how Sony's online stuff works? I thought they had the whole thing sussed out. And what if you could always use PayPal?

    Oh well.

  • Zomoniac #32 6 years ago

    smoison, 50 Cent sold through the roof, it was number two (behind the unmoveable NFS:MW) for the bulk of the Christmas period. And it was terrible, backed up by 47% average review score from 21 major publications according to Metacritic. If you have a car-modding game or a gangsta game and have a big advertising budget and/or license, it is going to sell, quality isn't an issue, and I don't believe the 3D GTA games have anything like the quality their sales figures suggest.

  • SharkVLion #33 6 years ago

    GTAIII; The Daddy; everything after that has just been about making money off the back of GTAIII's success.. no real innovation worth mentioning.. unless you consider motorbikes an innovation of course.. I dont.

    VC; too flat, too pink.. parts of town too samey.. no character..

    SA; Designers lost it completely thinking that eating and exercising were interesting and fun gameplay mechanics... and stretching it out so large (and empty) no doubt this came down from HQ in YankLand; 'supersize it and they will come'

    GTA4.. .. .. why waste yer money.. hardly gonna be a new experience.

    GTA had it's day with GTAIII.. downhill since.. unless you like the same thing over and over and over and over............

  • AceMaCool #34 6 years ago

    I read these exact quotes in Edge yesterday, so this "news" must have happended at least three weeks ago.

  • psychokitten #35 6 years ago

    Oh thank god, someone else that didn't like San Andreas much. I was starting to think I was the only one. Felt like it lacked soul. Yeah I know that sounds lame, but it just didn't do it for me. Vice City was brilliant.

  • EmiliasHorse #36 6 years ago

    I don't like GTA games in general..its the whole forced to do crime thing that botheres me. But Vice City was funny and had a superb soundtrack so I gave in and had a great time. GTA SA was different, I hated the idea story visual style and gameplay...I tried my best to like it but just loathed it all, 15 hours in I gave up and played something else. Does it get good after 16 hours?

  • Xerx3s #37 6 years ago

    Vice City was the best in the series.

    I disagree. GTA was the best in the entire series, after that it just went downhill.

  • lefizz #38 6 years ago

    I completely agree with everthing the guy said. A unified online system liek Microsofts just seems a better way of doing it. We currently dont fully know what Sony plans but it does sound to be much like the PS2 model. Will will know in a couple of months, just not this side of the pond.

    As for GTA3 Viceo city was by far the best, I thought San Andreas was while technically the most impressive it was far far less interesting. This might be an age thign but the whole 80's tongue in cheek Miami Vice setting was genius. I also just played better, too much empty space on the map in SA.

    Saints Row even with its lack of true humor is a far better game than San Andreas to me. It has a scale you can get your head around in a few hours and is just plain fun. SA wasn't. I put in down within a few hours.

  • PES_Fanboy #39 6 years ago

    Why are you all taking a murder simulator inventor's word seriously?

    Ban this sick filth.

  • dadrester #40 6 years ago

    i actually liked san andreas the best. not sure why really. i guess i quite liked cj (seemed more humble than tommy). i liked the customisation options (you didn't have to do them after the initial tutorial missions if you didn't want to) the sheer scale of the map (i always enjoyed exploring in the other gta games - incl. gta1) and i loved flying.

    as for live, i can see his point, if the service covered everything for a flat fee. but if i want to play ffxi i still have to pay square a subscription.

    i think sony are doing well to offer a free service, but i think they are lacking in standards across the board. i.e. people are familiar with live because it is implemented the same across every game, whereas with ps3 it'll be up to the developers and publishers to do as they please, making it more difficult for the consumer to get to grips with if there are significant differences between games. in reality i guess it will end up being a carbon copy of xbox live with most cases, since there'll be quite a few cross platform releases why drastically change something you already have coded (gui wise) for 360 to be different when you don't need to.

    by the way Dave Jones (iirc) was one of the founders of DMA and lead designer of ?GTA and GTA2, so he really does deserve credit for it's conception.

  • sharpfish #41 6 years ago

    He's right about MS/360. It's the obvious/sane choice right now if you want "HD gaming". Wii will sort out the other stuff.

    I wonder if there is a little bias in his words though as he would love to temp more buyers into 360 as it expands the audience for Crackdown ;) A bit far fetched but you never know!

    And he is bang on the money with "Vice City" being the best, it is still the standout game from the whole series and even with dated gfx is a joy to play. The atmosphere and general feeling is still one of the best found in a computer game.

    San Andreas was ok but it lost something (and I hate the whole cliched hip-gop gansta culture as it's potrayed in games). Hope GTAIV re-captures the vice city feel for the HD generation.

    I am referring to the PC version of Vice City which was sweet (in high res).
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 16:05

  • nickthegun #42 6 years ago

    i agree, san andreas wasnt very good

    He didnt actually say that. Unless theres a page two where he states "LOL!! GTA:SA IS TEH SUXXORZ!!!!!".....

    Anyway, yeah, SA has its faults and, yeah, the gangsta theme does get a little tiresome, but how anyone can say its shit is completely beyond me.......

    Its a game of incredible size and scope that was very well executed. I could have done without the stat progression and being forced to eat all the time, but that certainly didnt make it a bad game.

    Fwiw, Vice City was probably the most instantly enjoyable, but I did like the depth of SA.

  • dadrester #43 6 years ago

    I wonder if there is a little bias in his words though as he would love to temp more buyers into 360 as it expands the audience for Crackdown ;) A bit far fetched but you never know!


    not to mention <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/apb/index.html&q uot;>APB</A>

  • theweaze #44 6 years ago

    i was the biggest GTA fan up untill Fifteen hours into San Andreas when i thought "eh whens it gonna get good", and gave up.

    GTA3 was the game that will define the PS2 but i agree that Vice city was the one i enjoyed the most. as far SA i agree with psychokitten it definately lacked soul and seemed to be like a copied GTA game like Saints Row and all the others.

  • T4RG4 #45 6 years ago

    Hmm, just had a look at Crackdown shots... seriously looks like some geeky kids have modded GTA, looks wee bit brown pants to me. As ever... It could be good.

    As for GTA... loved Vice City, but after playing my brothers copy of SA for a while decided it was simply too bloated with stuff I didnt want to do to warrant a purchase!

  • Thornhillboy #46 6 years ago

    *puts name in box marked 'Vice City was favourite'*

    I have probably played San Andreas more since finishing the game than I did with Vice City, but I enjoyed playing through the Vice City story more. It was excellent.

  • Royal Fool #47 6 years ago

    Crackdown does look quite excellent.

  • thinktank #48 6 years ago

    Wasn't this story about the concern over sony's online strategy, not which GTA you liked the best?

    to continue off topic: Vice city was the best, total scar face rip off but i loved it.

  • tenma #49 6 years ago

    I thought San Andreas was ace but that the whole needing to eat/exercise thing was a little too much. And while it was sometimes fun to drive around the countryside for several minutes, other times it was just annoying if you were trying to get to a specific place.

    Vice City was too flat for me. For whatever reason I just could never get into it. GTA3 is still my fav.

  • Lost_in_Darkness #50 6 years ago

    Actually I liked SA the best out of the whole series. The immense scale of the world was amazing and i liked the theme's it was tackling since it was a nice change from the norm......though I hate any clones of the series and other shit gangsta games like that 50 cent piece of shit that I wouldn't touch with a 10foot clown pole.
    But yeah, I liked that GTA did it's thing with that theme since it hadn't been attempted properly in gaming previously and I think they pulled it off decently enough.
    However, I didn't like th lack of depth in the semi-rpg elements like the girlfriends, changing cloths and eating/working out and think they should have been fleshed out much further....but still kept optional so that it doesn't become a pain.
    On the whole though, I think SA is the best so far, then VC and finally GTAIII

  • Quine #51 6 years ago

    GTA1/2- Jump on bike, drive *really fast*, hit object 0.5 nanoseconds after it hurtles onto the screen. Had potential but top-down really made driving tricky.

    GTA3- Wow! In 3d! And it all actually works, and is fun, and you can *see into the distance*.

    GTAVC- Now with /\/\0t0rb1k3s! I'll never forget that chase through backstreets on the dirtbike, or the remote-controlled biplane bombing mission.

    GTASA- Agree with previous posters. Too big, too bloated. I wanted to like it, and some of the map was good, like that massive mountain. It did indeed lack soul.

    GTALCS- Liked it more than I expected- a blend of the ultimate GTA map and the PCJ500.

    Unless they get some proper multiplayer/online stuff going with the next instalment it's going to suck balls, but still shift many units.

  • secombe #52 6 years ago

    "Technically Impressive" and "San Andreas", two things I never thought I would see in the same sentence, unless one of them was preceeded with "not".

    I'm not a graphics whore by any stretch of the imagination (the last 3 games I played were Brain Training, Animal Crossing and Talmits Adventure) but SA looked absolutely appalling...to the point where the graphics (and camera) would actually get in the way of the gaming experience.

  • Scimarad #53 6 years ago

    San Andreas was the first one I really liked - Probably because I love RPGs. By all means make GTA more like Vice City (it's what the fans seem to want) but I'd love another game with the scope of GTA:SA, preferably one that would let me be the good guy if I wanted...

  • henrys_cat #54 6 years ago

    Personally I think that all of the GTA games have been great, but for different people in different ways.

    My favourite gameplay-wise has to be SA; the mission design much more polished than in GTA3 or Vice and technically it has some great improvements - swimming, climbing, no load screens, large interiors, towing, planes, ability to walk while aiming, bmx, dual wield weapons, parachute, etc, etc. The entertainment value is limitless.

    For style you can't beat Vice though, something about Ray Liotta's psychotic proclaimations and the horrendous amoral ultraviolence in eyeball blistering neon all to an iconic soundtrack can't be beaten.

    For me GTA3 feels like a great gameplay template that was beautifully honed in the later iterations.

    However Comparing them is difficult as GTA 3, Vice and SA all feel like parts of a trilogy by three different directors - the core mechanics are the same, but the style is entirely individual. Also it's nigh on impossible to look at SA without having played GTA3 or Vice beforehand - if you could look at it in isolation it would be an unbeliveable achievement.

    Also Crackdown looks rather poor; way too comicbook ridiculous with the "silly" sci-fi look, too close to Perfect Dark Zero (urgh) - I can't see it working, although I'd love to be proven wrong.
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 18:20

  • Mordum #55 6 years ago

    @henrys_cat
    "Also Crackdown looks rather poor; way too comicbook ridiculous with the "silly" sci-fi look, too close to Perfect Dark Zero (urgh) - I can't see it working, although I'd love to be proven wrong."

    Are you kidding? the comic-book style is perfect for a game like Crackdown... have you read what the plot of the game is? what the main character can do? if thats not the sort of thing straight out of a comic book then I don't know what is. Personally I think Crackdown is looking promising.

    As for the Sony online strategy, I've never agreed with the way they're doing it ever since I heard the first details. Trouble is, you'll never hear un-biased views from developers/publishers because they're either working with Sony, or for their rivals.

    oh, and my favourite GTA games were the first, and the third (both made an impact). Although I did like Vice City's 80's throwback style, it was very well done, as for SA... erm, no.
    Edited by 2 at 07/09/06 @ 18:31

  • dredd97 #56 6 years ago

    no, can't agree with you...

    crackdown does not look next gen to me, sorry if that pains you, but it clearly doesn't...

    watched a couple of the gameplay movies over on gametrailers and yes it has that comic book feel, but it's not the sort of game that needs it...

    when the good guy is being shot at in his car (he'd just nicked) i was fully expecting the car to be riddled with bullet holes, but nothing, not even a texture change...

    an opportunity miss i'm afraid... he'd probably like to it, but with m$ policy about xbox360 games not relying on the hdd, i think there missing alot of things to make this all stand out...
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 19:57

  • Metalfish #57 6 years ago

    I can't say I've ever played a bad GTA game, and I've played 'em all (even the rather hilarious Gta London add on pack). And I'll probably have plumb for the slightly cop-out choice of saying they're all good:

    Original: There was nothing like this at the time. Truely sandbox, and full of humour. Massively unforigiving though.

    GTA2: The futuristic setting gave everything huge personality, the respect system was pretty cool aswell. Best gangs: scientists, loonies and the Z-men.

    3: Probably the best laid out city, probably the best lead character for me. Terrible aiming.

    VC: Motobikes, yay! Actually the level of freedom was pretty much "spot on". The weapons were something of an improvement too. And the property thing stopped you just being "some guy on the street"

    SA: Personally I liked it. The sheer quantity of stuff to do shouldn't be underestimated. And the open roads were good when they weren't popping in and out of existance. The flying was good....

  • The-Bodybuilder #58 6 years ago

    >"No, of course not. Trust Microsoft"

    I would rather be suspicious and untrustworthy with one company, than with 10 of them.

  • The-Bodybuilder #59 6 years ago

    >"Anyway, yeah, SA has its faults and, yeah, the gangsta theme does get a little tiresome, but how anyone can say its shit is completely beyond me......."

    Let's face it, the true reason why many hate SA is because of the culture it uses, a culture that is different from thiers (apparently it is VERY hard for many to put aside thier bias against a certain racial culture). The culture of VC applied to the majority, added to the fact that many here are older gamers from the 80s, it's a double whammy.

    Trust me, they would say the same thing if the game was based in korea and with the korean culture with it. People just can't look past it.

  • admir #60 6 years ago

    GTA is overrated they all sucked

  • Mordum #61 6 years ago

    @The Bodybuilder
    "Let's face it, the true reason why many hate SA is because of the culture it uses, a culture that is different from thiers (apparently it is VERY hard for many to put aside thier bias against a certain racial culture)."

    And some people find it VERY hard to realise that not all black people are 'ghetto' don't they Bodybuilder... so why are you going on about it being a racial issue? its fair to say that people may not like the ghetto culture feel to the game... but its not fair to say people don't like it because of racial issues.

    @dredd97
    "crackdown does not look next gen to me, sorry if it pains you, but it clearly does'nt..."

    I never mentioned any sort of 'next gen look' about the game... I just said it looks promising, so it does'nt really pain me no, but thanks for your concern ;)... I think its going to be a blast to play through.
    Edited by 1 at 07/09/06 @ 23:05

  • albundy #62 6 years ago

    I tend to agree with The Bodybuilder. I know what you're saying Mordum about how it's also counter-productive to take the viewpoint that all black people = gangsta, but let's be real here. Some of the shite that gets talked about SA is so ironic, as to be not even funny. It's sick, it glorifies a decadent lifestyle, and blah, blah, blah. WTF? What are III and Vice City? Mario games??? Fact is, they are ALL as sick, and twisted and violent, and morbid and decadent as each other. But SA gets all the flack because it's "those filthy niggers" doing it. That's all. All this talk of a city being too big and all that is a smokescreen. Doesn't seem to piss the Oblivion fans off, does it? And you never here Football Manager fans complain about the games being 'too big'. Never. Since when was bang for buck a bad thing? No, SA hate is a prime example of racism that has been driven underground by the PC brigade, but still exists all the same. Because I am astounded that SA's Boyz in da Hood styling is seen as being any worse and any more corrupt than Vice City's Scarface's imitation. But hey, what do I know? I'm just a tolerant man after all.....

  • tenma #63 6 years ago

    albundy: exactly. The reason why people can play and enjoy mafia games (and how many of those have there been now? I'm sure a lot more than gangsta games) is because the mafia is seen as no longer being relevant in today's day and age. Mafia crimes are not on the news. Mafia imagery is hardly seen in popular music. If we were in the 20s or 30s, then mafia based games would probably be as antagonized as gangsta based games because the topic of discussion in the game would be relevant. We're no longer worried about being shot at by a mafioso crime boss but we are afraid of being shot at by the bloods or crips should we enter a bad side of California. We are afraid of black people who imitate the likes of Tupac and 50 cent in fashion because we see that as a potential sign of imitation on all fronts - crime included. The mafia is antiquated and retro while the gangsta theme is not and therefore something that still makes some people - from stay at home moms to anemic PC gamers - somewhat nervous.

  • yegon #64 6 years ago

    Not the biggest GTA fan, but Vice City was probably my fave. The map was too flat, but it was saved by an excellent theme, good soundtrack and passable story.

    I played SA on the Xbox & PS2 cumulatively for about 10 hours and was thoroughly unimpressed, largely because it felt like a decent game fighting against the hardware that could barely cope with it......then I played it on a PC and realised it's the only version that does it justice. I'm certainly no graphics whore, but it's a much better experience. Plain by current standards admittedly, but the increased solidity of everything, the huge draw distance and huge leap in resolution really improve the sense of immersion and sense of scale.

  • Metalfish #65 6 years ago

    Do you really beleive racism is responsible for all those in this thread who express a preference for VC over SA? Sweeping generalisations aside, perhaps it has something to do with the rather unavoidable repitition of gameplay/content that is common is trilogies (yes I'm aware it isn't strictly a 3 game series). Familiarity breeds contempt and all that?

    Though I'm not denying that some probably do find the stereotypical black american gangs in SA rather insulting. Why is our moral protangonist (completely unlikely the perhaps too psychotic Tommy) still obliged to kill cops and run drugs etc for his "crew", whats more why, when his life in Liberty has been suggested to be to avoid gangland violence, does he take to it instantly upon his return. Perhaps rather than cultural bias, people have a harder time relating to CJ due to this apparent hypocrisy of character was never present in the previous games.

    At least I'm hoping there's a lot more to this that just skin colour.

  • Genji #66 6 years ago

    Well, for me it's all about the skin colour. Black people make my eyes bleed.

  • albundy #67 6 years ago

    Who's saying that people prefer VC to SA because they are racist? VC is a great game, and all love that it receives is warranted. No, Tenma and I are talking about the anti-SA brigade. Those who seem to be of the opinion that it is shit, and use excuses that plainly don't make sense, as I pointed out a couple of posts up. It's these people that I find tiresome. I'd be less bothered if they would just come out and say it. "I didn't like SA because it was about black people, and in an escapist media (ie. games) I don't wanna have to play as a f*@%ing black guy". Because this anti-hip hop argument is ridiculous. I mean, VC is based on Scarface. FUCKING SCARFACE! How much more violent and anti-social can you get than Scarface???

  • Genji #68 6 years ago

    Scarface was Cuban, so not liking that game makes you racist, too.

  • albundy #69 6 years ago

    As in all things in life, there is a pecking order. True, a lot of white people can be anti-anybodynotwhite. But let's face it, black people are the ultimate pariah's, whereas most will tolerate Chinese/Latino/whatever to a degree. Hence why VC doesn't cop quite as much flak for its setting and style. Oh, and you're playing as a Italian-American in the game, so Western gamers can still feel comfortable playing as the White Guy, with all the blacks, Spanish and whoever else firmly typecasted as the bad guys. In order words, VC managed not to offend anyone's precious sensibilities, something that SA all-too-famously failed at.

  • darkphoenix #70 6 years ago

    Well, I think GTA III was the best of the 3d gtas, wich are the only ones that count nowadays and have litle in common with the older 2d titles.

    Vice City brought motorbikes and helicopters, a great unbelievable soundtrack, but had a map too flat and boring.
    The worst, it introduced the talking in our playable character, something I dislike since I get no pleasure in being a stupid-smart-ass-mafia-wanabe like Tommy Vercetti.

    Same ( even worst ) with GTA SA, I hated CJ, the way he talks and acts like a complete retarded, all the imposed black culture stereotypes, and that gangsta shit that I found nauseating. Even worst than Vercetti...
    Music was bad to, far beyond Vice City quality.

    But, I have to credit GTA SA for its huge and rich map, lots of diferent environments and the ability to actually fly well above the skyscrappers, explore every water section and bellow it, the little towns in the country, the sense that you could in fact get away from the cities if you wanted to and find some peace.

    There is no such thing as a map too large!!!

  • steoc4 #71 6 years ago

    Well pesonally I loved San Andreas.

    GTA was fantastic, completely original and wonderful to play. I really enjoyed playing it but it wasn't perfect either. It was a great game, but nowhere near as special as the 3d ones would come to be.

    GTA 2 added an interesting gang element, but I hated the style of the game and never got into it, the humour just didn't seem as good and the gameplay didn't really add anything.

    GTA 3 was jaw dropping. It was the first next gen game I played and looking back there was actually surprisingly little hype around it at the time. I'd heard it was GTA in 3d and was curious to how that would work, thinking they'd surely have to shrink the cities down to do them in 3d. How wrong was I! But what really caught me was the wonderful driving physics, it really was a revelation at the time.

    GTA Vice City came next. I played it and thought 'I paid full price for this!?!' It was the same game with motorbikes. I didn't like the city as much as Liberty City and although the story and characterization were a massive improvement on 3, they just never grabbed me.

    Finally, GTA San Andreas. I love this game. My favourite of the series. Although the gangsta theme annoyed me at first, it really didn't take that many missions to start identifying with CJ, he was quite a genuine down to earth and believable character, as were some of the others, and I really got over my initial prejudices. It was the first GTA game that made me care about the story. On top of that, I loved the game world. So what if some of the areas aren't used for missions? Don't go there if you don't want to. Personally I loved exploring, and I loved the open road. I also loved the variety, the amount of things you could do in the game was unbelievable. A particular favourite of mine was towards the end of the story, in Los Santos, with turmoil all around, I'd been involved in lots of shootouts, and there's general chaos going on, when I decide to get CJ to grab a motorbike and take to the open road. Blistering along the peaceful freeway listening to Freebird was a genuine, unscripted, emotional feeling while playing the game, I was actually there thinking 'why all the fighting' as I rode along... There were a few moments like that which made me adore the game. In addition to the huge amount of random fun to be had with the assortment of vehicles and weapons and minigames at your disposal.

  • tenma #72 6 years ago

    Perhaps rather than cultural bias, people have a harder time relating to CJ due to this apparent hypocrisy of character was never present in the previous games.


    Are you serious? You're honestly going to sit here and tell me the reason why most gamers couldn't relate to San Andreas was because they had a beef with the character's morals? As if killing cops, innocent civilians, fucking prostitutes - and then killing them, stealing, larseny and all the other indecent acts in the other GTAs are justifiable to gamers but CJ's reprise of his gang life role was not? C'mon.

    We're not saying that there aren't justifiable qualms about San Andreas - even I have said that it felt too large in parts - but rather the qualms about the theme of the game tend to sound hypocritical given the fact that its only different than the other GTAs because it's based in a predominantly black environment.

  • ave #73 6 years ago

    @tenma: Look up the word hypocrisy before responding.

  • albundy #74 6 years ago

    I can't help but be reminded of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. On the news, a black family would be automatically depicted as being looters, while a white family would be hailed as heroes, just trying to survive. This is similar to what we see with the 3D GTA games. Nobody minds cop-killing, prostitute-slaying and pedestrian-squishing when they're playing as light-skinned characters in predominantly light-skinned games. But the minute the controlled avatar is a black man, in a largely black enviroment, people suddenly develop morals. Yes, that IS hypocrisy. I know damn well what the word means. And it just goes to show how far games are behind films right now. Time was when no white man would dare go see a film with a black lead, but that's slowly changing. But in gaming, this is clearly not the case, as SA-hate demonstrates. For shame, all of you.
    Edited by 1 at 08/09/06 @ 08:54

  • spongebob #75 6 years ago

    Gameplay wise I think San Andreas is the best GTA so far. However, when it comes to story I think Vice City was better. So like Steroyd, I am eagerly waiting for Vice City Stories.

    As for Jones' comment. Sounds reasonable, but why is he still billed as GTA creator is a bit of a mystery to me.

  • nickthegun #76 6 years ago

    I actually could really relate to San Andreas. In my youth we were hard rockin amigos, but we did make time for early gangsta. NWA, ICE-T......all that palava. I think it appealed to our hard rockin sensibilities because they were shouty, angry and actually had something to say back then (before gangsta was adopted as another pop genre).

    Anyway, all the references, all the stuff they rapped about was pretty faithfully recreated. Hell, it was like Friday the video game. So in that sense I really appreciated it. GTA: SA really seemed to capture the essence of what those guys were talking about. I mean, it even has a nod to our own musical revolution, Madchester, in it.

    So on that level, I didnt mind the ghetto theme at all, in fact, i could probably relate to that in a better way than Vice City (despite being whiter than the driven snow). Mainly because it covers events of my early teens, whereas I was a bit young to appreciate Miami Vice. I just watched it for the car and Jan Hammer......

  • Mr_Whacker #77 6 years ago

    Doesn't seem to piss the Oblivion fans off, does it?

    Thats because Oblivion has quick travel. Not the only point of yours I disagree with though. SA lacked spark in real ways that derive from gameplay - poor dancing games, betting giving you limitless cash from day one, eating/excersing chores. And of course more pointless travelling than ever before. Thats why its not as good as VC. The only thing that is actually better is being able to climb fences.

  • theweaze #78 6 years ago

    albundy you clearly are very confused, dont try and make this about race because it has nothing to do with it.

    people didnt like san andreas because it was boring lacked the sharp humour of the other games, and yes the map was too big, i dont want to drive for half an hour to start a mission which otherwise was the same as the previous games.

    I agree that vice city for some was also too samey, what GTA needs is a revival and maybe thats what GTA4 is going to do. afterall it is the next real installment maybe they are saving something big for it.

    or perhaps maybe we are just all bored of playing this type of games??

  • belziah #79 6 years ago

    @nickthegun

    I couldnt have said it better. I also grew up around that time which is why S.A. is my favourite. I spent 2 weeks alone gambling on pool, the gee-gee's and in the casinos (GTA is my favourite genre game).

    Its also exactly the reason Saints Row is so shit. They may have seen the movies but they dont seem to have understood them.

    S.A.'s only fault in my book was the hardware and the travelling. The food/excercise elements were such a tiny part of the game it became irrelevant once you played past the first 4 hours.

    The fact that S.R. is a quarter of the size of S.A. and has a tenth of the intelligence and wit of the GTA series relegates it to "tech demo" in my opinion.

    S.R. is a lowly "rock-slanger" to GTA's P.I.M.P. Daddy.

    As for Mr Jones' comments regarding online, I would also prefer to have one place holding my details, so when it all fucks up there's only on place to bitch to.
    Edited by 1 at 08/09/06 @ 11:41

  • tenma #80 6 years ago

    @ave: Try taking your own advice next time. From your one line post devoid of any actual argumentation, it seems you're the only one here who needs assistance.

  • Turrican #81 6 years ago

    When you look at what happens when Microsoft don't look after game hosting duties on live (Burnout from EA), I think you will get a fair idea of what online life will be like for PS3 owners.

    Oh and I love all GTA games equally. Apart from the 2D ones, they got boring after mowing down the temple monks wandering around.

  • Lockjaw #82 6 years ago

    erm I've played and own Burnout on the 360 and it works perfectly online unlike the PS2 versions which gave me virtually no joy-but hey I didn't have it from day one aren't those live updates minted.

    Why's this in here anyway LOL
    Edited by 1 at 09/09/06 @ 13:21

  • captain-future #83 6 years ago

    GTA:VC was the best. End of THAT discussion. ;-)

    The guy has a good point I don't like that EA always does some monkey business even on Xbox Live.

    Although you could solve the privacy problem with pre-paided cards (which are relatively "anonymous";) but Sony will have to do a lot to even match Microsoft's excellent unified online service.