The Sony Thread

[Mecha Cow]

F*cking bullsh*t. Alright, so either GTA4 really is the greatest thing since sliced bread, or Rockstar has been handing out some serious cash and these reviewers are shamelessly grabbing it. Again, I'm sure the game rocks, but this sh*t is seriously grinding my gears.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Peanut

Because you're a pussy? Yeah. I don't overreact, that's just the way I type. Go ahead and ask people I talk to off the forums, they'll tell you just how much I "care" about most things in life.

Yes, I came back...and yes...because I'm a pussy

I don't mean to even get on you're case, but you really drag the place down when you have to spew out things like calling people idiots, pussies, and dumbasses...it's just uncalled for. Were all here for the same reason. We like tmnt. We don't need insults. It has nothing to do with how much you uhh..."care about most things in life" It has to do with the people around you, so please, have some courtesy.


So who here actually has GTA4? I wasn't really following this game, expecting it be just an updated San Andreas, but I was excited to learn just the other day about the free roam online co-op...that's gotta be fun. Also, I'm assuming that the stat system from San Andreas is gone? That's a shame if true.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Noob-Saibot

Were all here for the same reason. We like tmnt.

Incorrect assessment.

And I only rag on people who deserve the strife.

[AquaParade]

Alright, alright...We all like message boards...
And even if someone is a "pussy", they might be a pussy who was molested by their aunt and has no legs(No, not me), so just something to think about.

[R-iZZy]

Originally Posted by Peanut

Dude, pretty much popular opinion on that one. The story is a convoluted mess. Even the biggest MGS fanboys will admit that, but that doesn't mean it isn't good. I'm going to agree that it's better than any GTA story, though. Considering I don't remember dick all about any of the GTA stories, games I've actually beaten, and I remember a bunch of stuff from the times I've played the MGS games, games I haven't beaten. I think that says something.

Now that I think about it, the story does seem to have its fair share of messes. Triple agents, transformations through arm transfusions, the entire MGS2 premise; I can see how things can be seen as a big mix-up. But it's like you said, messy stories don't make for bad ones, just questionable yet entertaining ones.

But I think you got my point of the post. This wasn't supposed to be some MGS story vs. GTA story thing, it was mainly just me critiquing the ridiculousness of a reviewer saying that the game's story was "Oscar-worthy", when you could cite games that had a deeper plotline before GTAIV, yet was never complimented on "Oscar-worthy" writing. I will take into account though that I'm speaking prematurely, considering I don't even know the story of GTAIV.

Originally Posted by raphael_is_cool

I couldn't resist the dig at Juno. Sorry.

Sorry, this is long but I hope I've made some interesting points or given you food for thought at least:

I would agree with you on this 'aura' around Zelda but only because it was the first 3D iteration I played. Nothing else really stood out beyond that. If I'd played previous versions I'm sure I'd recognise that I was doing the same things again: going through dungeons, solving puzzles, rescuing Zelda from Ganondorf. The closest comparison would be the jump from the top-down GTA into 3D GTA. But in a GTA game I always had a reason to do a mission, a drive to keep playing, instead of just 'rescue the princess/beat big bad guy'. I came away feeling I'd achieved something by seeing the story to its end.

So that's all OoT was to you? You only noticed the puzzle-solving and the princess rescuing? No, let's not delve into the concepts of time travel, intricate plotting of the game's story, new weapons and twists, and the fact that with a 3D environment, the dungeons included a higher level of interactivity with Link. You're clearly overlooking some of the finer qualities in the franchise's transition into 2D while not really giving me any endearing qualities of GTA's transition besides this drive to idly complete missions.

Now, I couldn't say a GTA game has a better story than an MGS game (MGS1 particularly) but that is more to do with game design. GTA is free-roaming, the missions are spread out; whereas MGS1 was a straight-ahead plotline with only one possible variation. Not to mention that GTA games borrow heavily from established film tropes or actual films (the ending to Vice City anyone?) But in the GTA universe there have been some brilliant characters, some very memorable moments and some fantastic writing. The only reason you remember Zelda characters is because they're the same in every game.

The game's design was what contributed to Rockstar's lack in involvement with a memorable story? That seems ridiculous, considering No More Heroes had a fairly decent story while maintaining a free-roaming world. It's possible to have a great story while making your game a free-roamer, and the GTA games have always been pretty good at best when it came to stories. Now perhaps GTAIV has followed a new line, I dunno, but I've seen GTA game after GTA game give you a decent story while focusing more on what you can do in a free-roaming world. They haven't really tried finding that balance, so once again, I'm finding it hard to believe that this game's story is "Oscar-worthy", which was my point to begin with. You going off about Zelda was totally irrelevant to what I was talking about. And if you honestly believe that I remember Zelda characters only through them being the same, you're f*cking kidding yourself.

Now taking into account your point is that GTA IV won't have that new and special 'aura' around it I'd be willing to disagree. OoT was just a 3D version of any Zelda game with a few new tricks, as the series continues to be. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this is a bad thing and I'm not trying to start a fight. Fact is: people love Zelda. Story isn't always important to a game but it is a big part of making a game memorable. You only have to look at fans of FFFVII, Chrono Trigger, Deus Ex or Bioshock (to name just a few) to see that.

Dude, you're sitting here telling me that the story isn't as important, but is a key element in making a game memorable. This was the "aura" I was speaking of; getting a memorable experience through a game that gave you something no other game did. OoT did more than just transition the franchise from 2D to 3D, it told a tale that basically started a legend while also further revealing the mysteries of this famous land we've known for years. I believe GTAIV will definitely have the high replay value that a lot of the GTA games have, but that'll last until the next GTA game comes. I don't feel OoT can be replaced by any of its successors, and a lot will tend to agree. I can almost guarantee that GTAIV will be replaced by a successor, it's only a matter of time.

The way I see it is that generally different elements of a game appeal to creating certain memories. If you're playing single-player then the story becomes very important because that is what's needed to draw you in, to keep you playing. An RPG with a crappy story very quickly gets dropped as might an FPS which becomes monotonous. A good FPS usually seems to only stand out if it has a good story. While playing co-op campaign on Halo 2, I didn't really take much note of the story because the amazing experience was more to do with playing with a friend. I'm sure Peanut could attest to many fun experiences with Halo 3's online and offline multiplayer. I would say with OoT it was more the novelty factor than anything that made it memorable since you did not sing the praises of following games as nothing new really came of them. I would also factor in the 'shared experience' as in the event of a game. Much like a film that 'everyone has to see' you remember it because that's what everyone talked about and I think OoT came in a time when there wasn't anything else like it on N64. My examples are more recent Final Fantasy games; looking back, I didn't really enjoy them but I was playing because all my friends were.

So what you're telling me is that I only enjoyed the game because others did? Basically, you're telling me that I couldn't enjoy the game on my own accord. If the game wasn't critically acclaimed, I wouldn't enjoy it as much as I do now. I don't necessarily need the opinions of others to sway my way of thinking, I can formulate my own perceptions just fine. For the most part, I do agree with this section; I'm more of a single-person gamer, so I do tend to enjoy great stories with my game (hence why I prefer games like Zelda, Okami, Resident Evil, etc.)

Round off my main point is that GTA IV runs on a completely new engine, the experience of exploring a living, breathing city has been vastly improved and it sounds like Rockstar have worked hard to keep the story tighter, more plausible (small case in point: they kept clothing options limited to 'suitable' items) and thus more dramatic. Throw in the multiplayer as well and I think it's a big enough leap to guarantee that everyone will have some sort of memorable experience and come away with a glowing 'aura'.

Feel free to disagree if you wish, I just figured I'd make my point clearer.

To each his own. I hope my post cleared up my views a bit. I simply just wanted to express my doubt for this game deserving a 10. I know the game will be fun (so many new additions I'm happy about: taking cover, better acting, breaking into cars and hotwiring them, etc.), but I don't confuse that with the game being groundbreaking, which is something I expect from games being rated a 10. But who knows? Time will tell. The only way to find out is for me to try the game myself.

[raphael_is_cool]

I guess it's a case of each to his own. You seem to misunderstand that a lot of what I said was not directed at you, I was simply giving my thoughts on a whole topic. Your reply seems a little too aggressive. I was also trying to quantify this vague 'aura' concept.

The difference is that you can see all these great things in Zelda, although I can't help feeling you've blown right out of proportion, which I just don't care for. Link, Ganon and all that are achetypes, they never really spoke to me as fully-formed characters and I never got a sense of Hyrule as a plausible fictional world. But I'm not saying that hampers the game experience for everyone. Different strokes for different folks.

Getting back into GTA IV now reminds of that special touch previous games in the series had. Having played the game I can see how a reviewer might say the story, or I believe it was actually said "the performances" which are 'Oscar-worthy'. You seem to assume that anyone who says it means it exclusively, which seems foolish. You could even consider it hyperbole in order to make a point that the story is much more focused and hard-hitting in this incarnation (which it is).

I was also not saying I only enjoyed OoT because my friends did; nor that you did either. I was just thinking outloud really. I was covering the bases on what a 'memorable experience' is. And of course a story isn't always important in a game because not every genre lends itself well to having a story. Driving games don't need one, Unreal Tournament never needed one. Everyone loves Super Mario Galaxy and that's no great story. I think I already explained this when talking about multiplayer experiences as well.

What you also need to understand is that perhaps you're looking at the games differently to reviewers. They may not care so much about what's new or innovative, especially when looking at GTA, since if something's not broken why fix it? Most things from previous GTA games have been massively improved and there's a much more convincing, mature story to boot as well as a whole multiplayer element. I feel a 10 score is more to do with refining elements to their fullest and giving a wholly satisfying experience. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with a 10 (although I am not far enough to judge the game in its entirety) but if OoT got one then I'm pretty sure GTA IV would deserve one. Both improved on previous versions in different ways (although neither were really 'perfect').

Also, I think that Rockstar nailed it with an online element to their game because that is where the replayability is. Your point about being replaced by a successor is invalid though, because we both know all Zelda fans of course go out and buy the next game, I don't think they keep playing the same one over and over. If you mean memory-wise then also I disagree because other GTA games are also irreplaceable. I'd sooner go back to a previous GTA game as well.

But yeah, point is: each to his own. I hope you don't feel offended or anything; I'm not attacking you so please don't take things so personally.

[Peanut]

I beat Metal Gear Solid tonight and I'm about halfway through MGS2 at the moment. Everyone can now be surprised.

[Ra]

I'm just amazed the Sony Thread is alive again.

[Mecha Cow]

Are you enjoying it more than you did before?

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Mecha Cow

Are you enjoying it more than you did before?

Yeah. The thing is, I had never actually attempted to play through MGS. I had tried it at a friends house a couple times, but the story was a mystery to me. When I sat down to play MGS2 all those years ago, the entire thing made zero sense to me. And without being able to grasp certain points of the story, MGS2 is a cluster f*ck of nonsense; although the same can be said when you understand it, too.

Anyways, after playing through the entirety of MGS, which surprisingly does hold up fairly well for a PS1 game, the story of MGS2 made more sense to me, and the game was able to get it's hooks in a lot more firmly than it did before.

So yeah, new fan of the Metal Gear franchise is me.

[Mecha Cow]

Welcome to the dark side, buddy.

[Barkworm]

*head asplodes*

[Ecto Jedi]

I...Can't...Believe it.

[R-iZZy]

If only I had an RPG to launch in excitement for Peanut. Of course, that's a pretty stupid way to express my happiness on that one.

Oh boy! Have you actually played MGS3 yet?

Oh, and I do have to say that my doubts for GTA IV's proclaimed greatness have died down a bit after playing the game. The attention to detail on that game is just f***ing incredible. I didn't expect Rockstar to improve the franchise in that huge of a scale. I would still consider Ocarina of Time the better game, but I'll be damned if I sit here and say the game just slightly upgraded some basic sh*t from the previous games.

[Peanut]

Just beat MGS2! I can't believe I've beaten two Metal Gear games in a matter of days, and haven't touched GTAIV since I started. Weird.

[ThirdMarioBro]

Hell, I can't believe Smash Bros. Brawl and Mario Kart Wii have been sitting on my shelf since GTAIV came out. Rockstar made a new drug.

[Mecha Cow]

Have fun with MGS3, it's even better than the first two.

[Dr. Doom]

It's my favorite in the series.

[Peanut]

I'm enjoying MGS3 a TON! I love so many aspects of it, and the story is great thus far. Makes more sense than MGS2 did, at any rate.

[Ecto Jedi]

Glad to hear that.