Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories Review

By Tom Bramwell Published 4 November, 2005

Grand Theft Handbag.

Version tested: PSP

There are two ways to look at this GTA on PSP malarkey: 1) It's dull and unadventurous. 2) It's huge, vibrant and full of endeavour.

It is, by design, witty, varied and hugely endearing. There's a reason I'm not bored of the GTA formula yet, and why none of the clones have overtaken Rockstar: the most important rules that govern the world are very effective. You will be able to drive cars like a stuntman, and they will only break if you treat them like wrecking balls or flip them on their backs. You will be able to blow things up and perform implausible vehicular acrobatics. You will be able to listen to the music or comedy interludes of your choice. You will only fall foul of the cops when you directly annoy them or do more than a few excessively naughty things in succession. You will find new toys and treats lurking just where they look like they might be hiding. Almost everything can be fixed within five minutes of screwing it up. For all its quirks when you get out of the car, when you're in one it'll feel like an adventure playground and a ball-pond rolled into one. Liberty City Stories gets all of this right.

Even so, one could easily argue that it's dull and unadventurous. Held up against GTA III, Vice City and San Andreas, surely it is! It's full of samey missions, straightforward objectives, forgettable characters and familiar quirks and flaws.

Buuuut.

You have to bear in mind that GTA is about more than those things, and that the PSP hasn't really seen anything like this before. Sure, WipEout and Ridge Racer are handsome games, but this is an enormous, streaming 3D environment, often as good-looking as its PS2 counterparts - its shortfalls intermittent or cleverly disguised. We've all been to Liberty City already. We've all done most of what Liberty City Stories lets us do already. But this is uncharted territory on the PSP.

'Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories' Screenshot 1

I'll be having that bike, beaverface!

Next to San Andreas, which nearly drowned under the weight of its bells and whistles (being as they were made out of bling), LCS is a simpler and more focused effort. It takes up most of the stuff that worked anyway, and absorbs some of the best additions to the post-GTA3 titles while ignoring some of the worst. So, on top of the story missions, the taxi-driving, the emergency-servicing, the vast arsenal of melee, medium-range and distance weapons, the enormous variety of cars and the delightful collectibles (whether it's the 100 hidden packages or the one-of-a-kind cars), you've got bikes, diving out of moving cars, and the upgraded animation systems - and yet none of the snacking, exercising, dodgy rhythm-action, turf wars, spray-painting or questionable stealth. Or Hot Coffee.

Liberty City feels fresh and tight compared to the sprawling mass of San Andreas - the hilly terrain is welcome, the pathways and back-alleys well-placed, and the road system logical and realistic enough without being irritating.

Controls are mostly present and correct and sensibly mapped. The camera is now controlled by tapping L to centre (when it works), or, while in a car, holding L and pushing left/right/down on the analogue nub to look left, right or behind you. It does mean that you can't easily steer at the same time as doing a drive-by shooting, but it's doable with a bit of finger gymnastics. Nothing too awkward. Anyway, direct camera control was always going to be hard to do without a second analog stick, and although the camera will kill you from time to time, competent players will be able to keep that to a relative minimum. The rest works much as it does on the PS2 pad. Meanwhile, car handling is as loose and screechy as ever, and we're all comfortable enough now with the underlying mechanics and the general feel of this. In short, most of the speedy stuff is a bit lightweight, and the taller vehicles are prone to toppling, but it's usually pacy and responsive. And the handbrake is your friend.

Nothing's been done to make up for the on-foot problems, mind, although we didn't expect much. Player-character Tony Cipriani squirrels around, moves and jumps awkwardly and any shootouts he gets into quickly descend into just standing around waiting for everyone to die, particularly as you can't target while moving and the auto-target's often happier to pick out a civilian than your intended target. But, again, we're used to this - realistically, GTA's bread and butter is grandly thieving the autos.

'Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories' Screenshot 2

S'one way to avoid speed cameras.

The rest of the game lives in PS2 territory. The visual quality is about right, detail levels haven't dipped noticeably (any sacrifices are masked by the PSP's smaller, sharper image), and while the police aren't quite as excitable and numerous as they are in the other games, the number of pedestrians and the volume of civilian traffic is jolly impressive. Even the draw distance and level-of-detail effects aren't much worse than they were on PS2, and the frame rate, while it inevitably suffers in certain sections and probably isn't familiar with numbers larger than 30, isn't going to put anyone off. In its transition to PSP, GTA's picked up a few interstitial load-screens, and the odd pause when you get into a car and the game scrambles for the appropriate radio station, but on the whole it looks and loads with the acuity of a dyslexic Rambo. This isn't a disjointed GTA shoehorned onto a platform that can't handle it; it is GTA, but on the PSP. Well done Rockstar.

Equally in its favour, Liberty City's a funny place. The radio stations, no longer bogged down by 400 old songs you barely remember, are full of witty ads again (some of the best involve Citizens United Negating Technology - which, if not a collective nod to Jack Thompson, are certainly poking fun at that brand of sentiment), and the talk-shows feel sharper. Repetition's inevitable given the relative lack of disc-space, but what with all the changing cars and shooting things, it'll still be a while before you've exhausted the lot. Particularly the talk-shows (hurrah for Lazlow!). Listen out too for British rocker Crow, whose segment on helping the needy in third world countries is particularly mischievous.

By this stage, though, you're wondering when I'm going to start talking about what you actually do to keep the game alive. The thing is, I already am. The missions themselves are where the game is weakest - while passable, they're just glue for the game's true strengths which lie elsewhere. Doled out through Tony's various contacts, your missions involve delivering X to Y, going to X then escaping the cops to Y, killing a bloke at X and taking what he drops to Y, killing people scattered around (some even at Z!), taking out other cars, using a rifle to guard X at Y, and so on until your grasp of the last vestiges of the alphabet is without compare. On top of that are the usual array of rampages and unique jumps (complete with those oft-imitated cut-away camera angles), and the latter are more fun because, in general, exploring Liberty City and mining it for hidden treats is what sustains the game.

'Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories' Screenshot 3

I didn't do it.

The way LCS presents you with tasks and playgrounds is as familiar as ever - and the fact that you've been there before undermines the sense of excitement when you reach Staunton Island or Shoreside Vale for the first time. It's a bit tiring initially, too, to have to relearn the same ropes all over again, even though you can probably weave them into a tapestry blindfolded if you've played the other 3d efforts. Even so, the volume of fun-to-be-had exceeds that of most PSP titles - and you'll put more time into the game to reach Shoreside Vale than it takes to complete at least half of them.

The difficulty level, as ever, is inconsistent. Often you fail because you ought to be trying a different approach, and having to think a bit and apply your broad skill-set is where the game proves most satisfying. Gunning down the mayor in the park and nicking his mobile phone can be done by waiting for him to leave its closely-guarded borders and running him off the road, or you can snipe him then gun for the mobile using a bike, or maybe you just put your guns away, wander in and suddenly whip them out when he's ten feet in front of you. Or use a katana.

But, as we've established, a lot of the story missions are rather more straightforward, and some are arbitrarily difficult (like the feckless chainsaw palaver at the end of one of the mafia threads), or become difficult arbitrarily when your plot-object-car is overturned and blown up. The frustration stems more from the knowledge that returning to the point that killed you will be a tedious trek, of course, and the PSP version makes no concession to those with just five or ten minutes to spare - even if it does make near-flawless use of the suspend feature - continuing to rely on safehouses for save-games. What use is a taxi back to the mission-brief if you need to shop for guns and armour first? On the other hand, some players will greet mission-failure with a shrug and a determination to go off and have some more fun in the meantime; the frustration of repetitive routine is always harsher on reviewers hungrier for knowledge than they are for fun. Which is my way of saying, "your mileage may vary".

'Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories' Screenshot 4

You can switch clothes at safehouses. I like being a sailor. (Unrelated.)

Multiplayer, a new addition, warrants a similar sentiment, if only because two players are going to have to cover a lot of ground to find one another. Bring in a few more though and you might surprise yourself. In a game with such lousy third-person mechanics, I didn't hold much hope for this, but beyond the cluster of everyman game modes like deathmatch and capture the flag are some more interesting examples. Like fighting for control of a tank (one chap in it, the others armed with rocket launchers), or playing tug-of-war with limousines. All throughout the game's huge play area. And naturally the street races are engaging too. Given GTA's almost universal appeal, it may actually be practical to, you know, actually play this in public, too. Like the advertising said.

Not that GTA LCS will require much of its own. Liberty City was where it all began - both for the series, whose original top-down effort began there, and for the Rockstar monopoly, which began with GTA3 - and its return here is the best advert yet for Sony's claims that the PSP is as powerful as the PS2. In gamey terms, its return also underscores the series' strengths, and best sums up the game's approach: not so much more of the same, but just plain the same, since you're patently not bored of the same. Not a truly outstanding new Grand Theft Auto game then, but an excellent PSP game. Although I do wonder how it'd do in a year's time.

9 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (77) Latest comment 6 years ago

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

  • petebritish #1 6 years ago

    GTA 3 was the best GTA IMO. Still unsure whether to get this is it worth the hassle of the old faults of save game points etc.?

  • Empedocles #2 6 years ago

    Baa

  • tengu #3 6 years ago

    Played this a bit this morning, and it's every bit as good as the review says. There's no getting away from how awkward that bloody little stick on the PSP is for controlling it though :(

  • PuffyPipe #4 6 years ago

    GTA3 is just pick up and play heven! finaly a game i would buy the PSP for!

    When do you guys think the PSP will come down in price? :(

  • JackThompsonsAnArse #5 6 years ago

    Any indications from EG regarding battery life?

    Vice City was the best (3D) GTA ;o)

  • DaM #6 6 years ago

    Don't think we'll have to wait long Slurpy!

  • OnlyMe #7 6 years ago

    I'm actually selling my PSP now. Strange as it is, just as the game I actually bought it for in the first place comes out. I've realized that it's just another GTA game, but on a handheld - and there's still too many games I've not bought yet for my stationary consoles. Like Shadow of the Colossus.

  • UncleLou #8 6 years ago

    In before "meh give me phoenix wright" posts. Handheld gaming just took a quantum leap.

    That's a bit rich, seeing that you're always "meh" poster number 1 in each and every DS thread.

  • Derblington #9 6 years ago

    I'll be buying this this afternoon!

    /hugs PSP

  • rinoaMW #10 6 years ago

    which isn't out for months Onlyme.. so buy this , play it till bordom.. then have more bargining power when you sell your PsP.. then buy SoC with the proceeds :)

    looking forward to playing this when i get home :)

  • tengu #11 6 years ago

    Doesn't WAB version changer 2.50 let you run 2.00 games on a 1.50 PSP?

  • towser #12 6 years ago

    Hmmm... using a cheat for ammo I see from some of those screenies. Either that or you love hoarding ammo.

  • oerhoert #13 6 years ago

    It reads like a seven... It walks like a seven.. It has to be a seven?

    Argh. If I am to believe this review, this game is as broken as previous versions (sans the hideous San Andreas framerate, hopefully) -- broken, inconsistent missions being the most prominent problem. Yet it still receives a nine? I don't get it.

    Then again, the trainwreck that was San Andreas on the PS2 received a nine as well. Perhaps it's just not feasible to apply normal game design criteria as long as it's GTA?

    I mean, if this is about exactly the same as GTA3, then it should receive about the same score as GTA3 would have received had it been re-released on the PS2 today. It's not like the game's better just because it's on the PSP.

    At least the review was informative about all I was curious about. I now know that I am going to be moderately entertained with it, but that it ultimately has all the problems of the previous games. That's fine. I still don't think that warrants a nine, though.

  • mattius30 #14 6 years ago

    I've been playing this since last night - and I have to say it is bloody brilliant. Battery length surprised me - i played for four hours before i had to recharge and the shorter missions make it much more playable than any of the big console versions. It may be easy for some people to say that 'oh its just another GTA - but to be fair, Mario Kart DS isn't exactly breaking the mold. GTA PSP is just a fun, easy to pick up game with next to no loading times and simply amazing graphics. It's scary though, as this is coming from someone that didn't like GTA 3, VC or SA.

  • zErOb_cOOl #15 6 years ago

    I knew it would be a 9. Knew it knew it knew it.

    Knew is a funny word when you read it more than once.

  • Chtulie #16 6 years ago

    Seems a bit odd to have kept the stnadard save game and mission restart mechanics of the console games for the hand held version, a platform where you've got little time to waste with doing things that isn't actually playing the game. It's like having extended loading times, isn't it?

  • zErOb_cOOl #17 6 years ago

    "We've all been to Liberty City already. We've all done most of what Liberty City Stories lets us do already. But this is uncharted territory on the PSP."

    So what?

    It was a bad idea to make pretty much the same game then wasn't it!

    Its a pretty bad idea to re-hash old games on the PSP full stop IMO. Just lazy.

  • p3rks #18 6 years ago

    The 9 seems a bit high considering the review...

    Vice City was the best GTA by a country mile.

  • krudster #19 6 years ago

    /wonders how long a country mile is...

  • valli #20 6 years ago

    it should receive about the same score as GTA3 would have received had it been re-released on the PS2 today

    IMO, +1 for tech achievement is pretty fair. So it's 8/10 on the PS2, still a great game! \o/

  • Dr_Actually #21 6 years ago

    "broken GTA ", the trainwreck that was San Andreas on the PS2 "

    Utter, hater bollocks

  • SirScratchalot #22 6 years ago

    I still hate lock-on (strictly PC versions of the other GTAs for me!), but after being nearly burnt out by San Andreas the return to a more concentrated play-area is a god-send.

  • Universal_Hamster #23 6 years ago

    Had a quick go this morning... Im very impressed.
    Like GTA? You will like this. Simple, end of discussion.

  • Blerk #24 6 years ago

    the trainwreck that was San Andreas on the PS2

    Did you play a completely different San Andreas PS2 to everyone else?

  • Bezzy #25 6 years ago

    Man, the turf wars was one of the few things that was actually pretty nice about SA. But yeah, everything else, I don't mind skipping :)

  • valli #26 6 years ago

    I think he played an oerhört* early beta.

    *) Swedish for "enormously"

  • Derblington #27 6 years ago

    "It was a bad idea to make pretty much the same game then wasn't it!"

    No, because this is on a handheld and that has to be factored in to the review and score. The game is doing something brand new for that market.
    The "bad idea" is to continue making "pretty much the same game" every few years on the PS2, surely? GTA hasn't really evolved since GTA3, and this is no different, except it's opening it up to a whole new market and that *is* a big and important thing.

  • oerhoert #28 6 years ago

    "Utter, hater bollocks"

    Not at all. Have you played SA on the PC? It's a pretty overwhelming demonstration of how the game Rockstar strived for with San Andreas was utterly uncomfortable on the PS2. Frequent, too long load pauses, frame rates often down in 15-20... Technnically speaking, it <em>was</em> a wreck.

    I enjoyed the PC version, though, but I couldn't even imagine calling it a nicely designed game. Because it's not. It's fun, but it's partly broken, and I think reviews should acknowledge that -- IF, of course, the new game is as broken as SA.
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 09:47

  • mattius30 #29 6 years ago

    I get so annoyed with the 're-hash' argument - especially in reference to the PSP. In the first few months of Nintendo DS's life - what did we get? Mario 64, perhaps the oldest 'rehash' in recent years, Rayman 64, another oldie, Ridge Racer 64, another oldie, Asphalt Urban, The Urbz, Tiger Woods, Spiderman 2 the list goes on... This is NO different to the PSP or any other console. What are DS fans getting excited about now? Mario kart and Animal Crossing. If you aren't into a game then fair enough - but I do think it's niave to scream 'rehash' when the industry is built on them.

  • oerhoert #30 6 years ago

    Also, that it's a handheld game is completly irrelevant.

    A good game is a good game -- as a gamer, I couldn't care less about what format the game's on, console, PC, handheld or even n-gage -- if it's good, it's good, and if it's not, it's not.

    The only thing that needs to be taken into consideration, is the technical limitations of weaker formats. But technical limitations has never stopped talented people from making good games.

  • Derblington #31 6 years ago

    But the fact this game is on a handheld is a nod to it's technical achievements, and is something to be kept in mind. Look at GoW - it's technical acheivements are half of its appeal, the actual game is worth about a 7 imo.

  • kangarootoo #32 6 years ago

    I don't want to pick on the score, as for the most part I +/-2 in my own head anyway until I've played the game myself. But given that it sounds like some of the design issues that seem to be part and parcel of the GTA series are STILL present, 9/10 seems a bit high.

    Playing through San Andreas I frequently switched off the console, returning later to continue when my patience had been restored. There were some awwwwful oversights (mainly surrounding mission design) that really shouldn't still be there 2 sequels down the road. Not played this one and I'm sure it will be fun, but will it also piss me off badly on occasion? If so, then it doesn't really get a 9 in my book, however good it is in between the bits where it drives me nuts.
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 10:00

  • tubeoftoothpaste #33 6 years ago

    EG love their 'two ways of looking at things' dont they. Bless 'em.

  • kincaide #34 6 years ago

    for those not on the forums, this release does force you to upgrade to version 2.00 (even if you have the magic "wab" changer

  • HarryB #35 6 years ago

    yeah, GTA was still the best to me... the city wasn't huge, it was just right as there were plenty of different areas but never boring travels either... it was a groundbreaker and I want it back on nextgen! :p just kiddin just make gta...4? 5? 6? im not sure... I think 4 back to the kind of style of GTA3, modern day, no "thuggin'"

  • zErOb_cOOl #36 6 years ago

    "Man, the turf wars was one of the few things that was actually pretty nice about SA."

    It was a constant job trying to keep them all! Never mind the rest of the game. Annoying how easily they could be taken over.

  • Genji #37 6 years ago

    One of the issues that I had with San Andreas was the size. Well, not so much the size, but the fact that most of that size was comprised of absolutely nothing, just empty scenery.

    It's good to see that the PSP one seems to be down to a more manegable size. And they ditched the gangsta storyline that I utterly, utterly hated in SA.

  • sleepless #38 6 years ago

    Another overrated mediocre GTA game. I don't get it. Rockstar is making same games..over and over for last 5 years..same system..no style graphics..solid gameplay..boring after few hours..laughable story. 5 years of almost identical GTA games + few other not so great games. I simply don't get it as well as why Beyond Good & Evil was not successful.

  • tiddles #39 6 years ago

    One of the issues that I had with San Andreas was the size. Well, not so much the size, but the fact that most of that size was comprised of absolutely nothing, just empty scenery.

    I think that's completely wrong. San Andreas has many flaws, but the environment wasn't one of them - EVERYWHERE you went, even out in the middle of nowhere, there was always something of interest within your range of vision. You never felt you were wasting your time exploring out of the cities.

  • tiddles #40 6 years ago

    What's the RRP for this, by the way? Went to pick up a copy from Oxford St, and HMV and GAME were both selling it for £40! No thankyou... One to get online, methinks

  • Shadar #41 6 years ago

    So, I haven't played this yet. Which probably means this is a "h8ter pos7". I probably won't be playing it either, since I've actively disliked Vice City and San Andreas. But I played them, nonetheless. They were horrible. Why?

    Broken camera control; seriously, hideously, unmentionably bad combat implementation ("Hello. I think I'll just proceed to lock onto the pedestrian behind me, if you don't mind";); boring missions that usually acted as little more than filler material whose primary incentive for completion was to just get them out of the way and unlock more terrain. Since the game got more "realistic", with aggressive, tough cops, in Vice City, I think it lost a lot of the playground charm. GTA3 was, at its heart, an arcade game in the land of do-what-thou-will. Just struggle a little with the missions, and you were rewarded with immense firepower and a tight, fun yet wide playground.

    Vice City diluted the concept by lessening the random fun factor, and making the game a whole lot harder. It also consumed even more time. Instead of having fun immideately, you had to battle with the missions to get anywhere. I played San Andreas for five or six hours, and I didn't glean a moment's worth of fun out of it because all I saw was poorly designed missions and a hostile game world that would respond with maximum force whenever I tried to have some fun.

    The whole point of the GTA-series has, since its inception, been about having fun within the very loose constraints of a game world. Tightening the constraints by relying on often very poorly designed missions seems like a case of misunderstanding your own creation, pretty much what Bungie did with Halo 2. Where's appeal in being on a guided tour in the land of free will?

    I just can't see how that warrants a 9/10. Of course, the reviewer might have loved the game to death, but what about a slight bit of objectivity? Will the game experience be as valuable to most every player? If not, then 9/10 is too much. Also, as Oerhört commented earlier, how can a game that's technically broken in most every aspect except the realization of the game world garner such critical acclaim?
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 11:43

  • Bezzy #42 6 years ago

    "It was a constant job trying to keep them all! Never mind the rest of the game. Annoying how easily they could be taken over. "

    Well, in one sense, it's fair that it's harder to keep greater amounts of turf. It makes sense.

    But, aye, it could have done with a little tweaking. It's a bit much to annoy players when they're off doing other things in other places. There's a number of ways to could alter it into a state which doesn't annoy so much. Something as simple as only allowing attacks on the territory while you're in that particular turf. Maybe have a counter tick down while you're in the turf. Too much time spent loitering there, and it invokes a reprisal raid?

    I dunno. You could fix it lots of other ways, too. I just really liked how it was an open city-wide passive challenge, rather than a bookended mission. Complimented the rest of the core mechanics better than the often fragile scripted missions did.
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 11:44

  • Genji #43 6 years ago

    @tiddles

    It's not "wrong" to think that. There was nothing that interested ME. If you enjoyed it, hey, all power to you.

  • UncleLou #44 6 years ago

    I suppose these games are too popular for some folks to admit to themselves that they could possibly like it. Knocking GTA is almost as 'cool' as knocking EA seemingly.

    Rubbish. I like them, but I also think they are all horribly flawed, and the excitement around them isn't appropriate. Bought all 3, finished none. Got my money's worth out of all 3, but was also frustrated and bored to tears everytime halfway thorugh the mainstory. Does that mean I am not allowed to comment? And I hadn't so far, but you made me do it. :p

  • Genji #45 6 years ago

    "But if you don't like the game, why comment? Comments on why you don't like it based on playing Vice City are about as useful in the context of this review as me saying why morris dancing doesn't seem like my thing."

    ...because arguments are fun, and (mostly) constructive? There wouldn't be any "discussion" if everyone agreed.

  • Dr_Actually #46 6 years ago

    The odd irritating glitch does not equal 'broken'

  • oerhoert #47 6 years ago

    Well, because a.) the review states pretty clearly that little has changed, and because b.) it still receives an almost obligatory 9/10?

    I have no problems with EG liking GTA on the PSP, not at all. What I have a problem with, is how they actually write a review that seems pretty fair, critcizing the bits that don't work and so on, and it still ends in a SHINY, FANTASTIC 9/10.

    9/10 - that's almost flawless. Resi 4, HL2, Halo, Wind Waker territory. Yet the text does in no way praise the game in the manner we're used to for other 9/10 games around 'ere.

  • Scimarad #48 6 years ago

    "the trainwreck that was San Andreas on the PS2"

    Er, okay, if you say so...

    Personally San Andreas was the first GTA I really got into. That huge world (and the ability to fly planes) must just appeal to the RPG fan in me.

  • JackThompsonsAnArse #49 6 years ago

    I think my main issue with San Andreas, at least graphically and design-wise, was the way they opened up the game world, but kept the inherent engine.

    To elaborate what I mean: I go flying a plane, or riding a quick bike down the LA (sorry, San Andreas) river or train tracks....after about half a minute or so of top-speed driving, the draw distance of the textures gets noticeably left behind, until I'm eventually driving in 'whiteness' as the streaming is still trying to paint textures on areas of the gameworld I no longer occupy. This is also happened in previous versions, but was less apparent due to the equivalent clutter preventing long, uninterrupted journeys.

  • moggsy #50 6 years ago

    GTA has never been technically perfect, but it has always bean easily good enough to be extemely enjoyable to play. Sure if you're a programmer and you're looking for faults with textures, draw distance etc then you will find them. Most people however enjoy the freedom the game gives them and if this is at the expense of a few technical glitches then so be it.

    Bring on GTA on the PS3 - maybe this'll be the point at which the full GTA concept can be unleashed without any technical problems. For now though I'm really enjoying GTA PSP and as I'm taking a long flight on Sunday it's been released at the ideal time for me.

  • asandbrook #51 6 years ago

    re: "But if you don't like the game, why comment? Comments on why you don't like it based on playing Vice City are about as useful in the context of this review as me saying why morris dancing doesn't seem like my thing."

    - I think it's fair to get a bit of discussion going about this one as it's a franchise that we'd all like to see continuing and evolving into something better and better. To all those furious that there are negative comments about SA - I think you've got to just acknowledge that everyone has very different experiences of the game. These people should make their opinions known - if you look at criticism that has been made of SA across the web you'll find a lot of the same points cropping up, so it might be worth considering that these people might at least have a point:

    Poor mission design, play area a little too large and unmanageable, tedious and sometimes very pointless minigames, still fairly ropey last generation combat and little graphical development.

    If Rockstar kept listening only to those who absolutely love the product then we'd just end up with something supposedly 'bigger and better' every year with just a whole host of exta features (as in SA) that, in the opinion of significant minority, don't necessarily improve the original GTA3 formula.

    However...it sounds like in LCS (maybe due to hardware limitations as much as anything else) that they've listened to the criticism and, as a result, managed to come up with a product completely in tune with the genius that made GTA3 such a worldwide smash.

    I'm a little sick of people just kicking and screaming whenever they hear comments that don't agree with their experience of a game - I always like to think that Eurogamer has been a site where people can openly discuss with a modicum of intelligent debate going on...

    P.S. Just for the record I put about 40 hours of effort into GTA SA and found the experience occasionally magnificent but more often than not a bit of an unfocused mess.

  • StixxUK #52 6 years ago

    I want you all to know that I don't give care about this. I just care that you know that I don't. Got bored of GTA about 10 hours into San Andreas.

  • Twinfalls #53 6 years ago

    How horrible. So now children can take this rubbish around with them wherever they go. What a fucked up world.

  • Perry #54 6 years ago

    Hard to pick the PSP and GTA hate fellas on this forum!!

    Funny thing is, you can whinge all you want about the game, 99% of people (i.e. non tall-poppy slayers) love this game because it is simply amazing. Vice City made me buy a PS2. This made me buy a PSP.

    Because it is simply amazing. If you get upset when a scene pauses for 2 seconds, then you need a new life IMHO.

    Rant over

  • tengu #55 6 years ago

    lol, funny how the people who don't like GTA(and have likely never played THIS version at all) are the ones writing all the monster length posts.

    Tear away lads, no one is going to be 'converted' to your way of thinking no matter how much bile you try to pour on everyone's excitement.

    GTA LCS is great, been playing it over lunch and having a great time. Well worth the 23 quid I got it for.

  • Dr_Actually #56 6 years ago

    ".after about half a minute or so of top-speed driving, the draw distance of the textures gets noticeably left behind, until I'm eventually driving in 'whiteness' as the streaming is still trying to paint textures on areas of the gameworld I no longer occupy. "

    More likely a problem with your PS2 loading slowly

  • JackThompsonsAnArse #57 6 years ago

    ".after about half a minute or so of top-speed driving, the draw distance of the textures gets noticeably left behind, until I'm eventually driving in 'whiteness' as the streaming is still trying to paint textures on areas of the gameworld I no longer occupy. "

    More likely a problem with your PS2 loading slowly

    I thought that too, but then I tried it on my XBOX and got the same thing. Maybe I'm just too fast for the CPUs ;o)

    asandbrook: Nail hit squarely on head. I'm an old skool lover of the entire GTA series, from playing it on my ropey old Pentium 90 right up to San Andreas, yet fairly fundamental flaws, that do hinder my enjoyment of the game, continued to pop up year on year.

    Example:

    I *loved* being able to fly planes 'properly' in SA - but if that came at the expense of finally fixing the graphical glitches or fighting elements that so flaw an otherwise great game, I'd rather have just stayed with cars and maybe m070rb1k3s.

    The better a game - or, more aptly, a game 'dynasty' - is, the more people will play it, and the more they will, ipso facto, find more things they would like remedied.

    I'm not a R* hater - currently playing The Warriors (extremely part-time!) and loving it.

  • akellard #58 6 years ago

    "Personally San Andreas was the first GTA I really got into. That huge world (and the ability to fly planes) must just appeal to the RPG fan in me."

    I completely agree with this... until those fecking Catalina missions.
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 14:20

  • Feanor #59 6 years ago

    "9/10 - that's almost flawless. Resi 4, HL2, Halo, Wind Waker territory. Yet the text does in no way praise the game in the manner we're used to for other 9/10 games around 'ere."

    Have to agree with this point.

    What do Rockstar say when journos ask them why they don't let you retry missions with the same equipment?
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 14:49

  • captain-future #60 6 years ago

    Nooo way!

    I've read other reviews that say it's basically your GTAIII-Port (btw: Vice City was the best in the series. period. IMHO.) with absolutely nothing new.

    Because I don't own a handheld (and probably never will) I have to rely on hear-say (yes, I know!) but I simply can't believe it's 9 out of 10.
    Edited by 1 at 04/11/05 @ 15:33

  • Mashum #61 6 years ago

    The fact that armour and gun powerups start to lurk outside your hideouts after a certain amount of the secret packages have been picked up made GTA3 the least harrowing to play of the 3d GTAs - I hope they take the same approach in GTA:pSP.

  • Mashum #62 6 years ago

    > Probably "how realistic would that be?"

    If I wanted realistic I would nip off to the local Spa and pick up a medium size pack of PG Tips then maybe think about going to bed early as I'm on shift tomorrow.

    Bugger realism :(

  • squeakyg #63 6 years ago

    I think the disparity between "all the GTA flaws" and the 9/10 score can be explained by the fact that THE REVIEWER ENJOYED THE HELL OUT OF IT. You call that "biased"... like he's not allowed to really enjoy the game and make a supposition that you will too. I thought that's what reviewers were supposed to do.

    People who like the GTA games can overlook its flaws, because it's just so damn enjoyable to drive around in such a well-structured comedy world. Every radio advert that makes you chuckle makes up for the bad targetting. Every time a cutsecene makes you laugh, it makes you forget the camera is annoying. Every time a pedestrian says something MENTAL, you adore the game for being so kooky. And so on. The flaws that make it technically 6 out of 10, are redeemed by the fun things that bring it back up to 9.

    You crazy guys, with your obsession for numerical scores. Only on Eurogamer. Never understood it. The sooner they stop putting scores at the end, the better it will be for comments sections. It's like you've lost the ability to see the world in shades of grey... to understand that games are about having fun. Stop seeing things in a numerical value between 1 and 10 - which, especially for Eurogamer reviews, has very little to do with the experience of playing the game.



    Edited by 2 at 05/11/05 @ 03:38

  • Genji #64 6 years ago

    "lol, funny how the people who don't like GTA(and have likely never played THIS version at all) are the ones writing all the monster length posts."

    Did you actually read the monster-length posts? Or did you stop once you saw "GTA:SA" and "problems" in the same sentence? Try reading asandbrook's post. All of it. He actually says some positive stuff about LCS at the end. There's not a lot of hate there.

    There are some good points to be made, but nothing constructive can come of them if different opinions can't be respected. I don't agree with the people that call GTA "overrated trash", but there's a difference between that and constructive criticism.

    Nobody's trying to "convert" anyone. If you find a game fun, then that's that, and nothing that anyone says can change that. I post comments to these articles because I enjoy discussion. I try to be honest about my opinions, and explain them as best I can.

    Blanketing everyone who found problems with GTA:SA as "GTA haters", or whatever, is not constructive and, at least in my case, not true. Neither is the suggestion that we "don't know how to have fun". The definition of "fun" varies greatly from person to person.

    Attack the argument, not the person.
    Edited by 1 at 05/11/05 @ 05:27

  • tengu #65 6 years ago

    I thought that's what I was doing, what with there being no personal attacks of any kind in my post. But if it 'fits' for you to take my post otherwise, then go ahead.

  • souljah #66 6 years ago

    Excellent comment squeakyg.

    Sums it up for me.

  • Genji #67 6 years ago

    @tengu

    I was only partly responding to your post. Many of the other ones - on both sides of the argument - have been needlessly confrontational and aggressive. If you didn't mean it like that, I apologise.

  • tengu #68 6 years ago

    Don't worry about it ;)

  • Xerx3s #69 6 years ago

    meh. GTA 1 was the best gta, anything after that was average at best.

  • oerhoert #70 6 years ago

    So, you say the genious radio chatter makes up for mediocre missions? Well.

    For me, the freeform parts of GTA have always been enjoyable. Yet I don't think they stay interesting for more than a couple of hours, and that's when I'd like to turn to missions. When the missions turn out to be usually a.) simple and uninteresting/mediocre, or b.) broken, well that does quite a bit to the level of enjoyment I get out of it.

    Don't get me wrong here, I love parts of GTA 1, 2, 3, VC and SA, all of them are games I'm glad I own. Still, for a game like San Andreas, when the game is constantly oscillating between the fantastic and the deeply mediocre, I don't see why I should hail it as the second coming. It's not an example of examplary game design the way HL2, Wind Waker, Resi 4 and Shadow of the Colossus are, it's unfocused and underdeveloped, and I just fail to see why that should be applauded.

    Mind you, I'm NOT speaking about Liberty City Stories here, as I haven't played it ... yet.

    I like the GTA games, and I particularly loved GTA3's urban ambience, SA's size and the first game's immediateness. But to imply that they're actually milestones, game design wise? It <em>is</em> quite a stretch. Yes, they were early with providing sand box gameplay. Yes, none of the clones come close. But still, the only part of GTA gameplay canon that really is fully developed, is the car physics. A property that isn't, in my estimation, something you really get used to.

    But now, I'm off to play some GTA3. Maybe it is better than I remember.
    Edited by 1 at 05/11/05 @ 18:42

  • Duckers #71 6 years ago

    Shame it's an 18-rated game. Damn you, age-rating people!

  • velcrow #72 6 years ago

    my first post....why because I agree with oerhört... psp and 9/10's seem too common. Where is that "we're immune to hype" feel that I used to get when reading the reviews.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/05 @ 00:48

  • tengu #73 6 years ago

    Curse the PSP for having some good games CURSE IT!!!

  • Jontacular #74 6 years ago

    Excellent comment squeakyg.

    Sums it up for me.

    Likewise, a 9/10 comment there.

  • oerhoert #75 6 years ago

    Have to add something here... I actually went with what I said, and re-played GTA3 on the PC.

    And it's actually quite good. (Interestingly, it's also prettier than SA on the PC, AND runs better.) If LCS is as good as GTA3 (again PC, haven't played the PS2 version), and not (shivers) as techincally overambitious as the PS2 San Andreas, it might be worth getting. I'll definitely give it a shot.

    Yet I still miss any EG staffers taking part in the discussion, and perhaps answering to some of my blatant accusations. :)

    Or, to make it easier, I can compress my questions down to just one: Why is the clumsy design that have become tradition with the series so forgivable, in your eyes?

  • tiddles #76 6 years ago

    Why is the clumsy design that have become tradition with the series so forgivable, in your eyes?

    Because it's fun?

  • rommy667 #77 6 years ago

    this is a fantastic version simple as that :)