GTA: San Andreas is actually not that good

[hygraed]

I've been playing Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas since I bought it for my PC back in June of '06. At the time I thought it was the shit. A huge, freeroaming area made up of three cities and a shitload of backcountry, all traversible by car, plane, or boat, as well as full freedom to commit all sorts of violent crimes anytime you want? SIGN ME THE FUCK UP!

It was all I played for nearly two months. Then I got stuck on the last mission and decided to put the game aside for a while. I started playing Sid Meier's Pirates!, Half-Life, and The Movies. I had a good time with those for quite a while, but decided eventually to fire up San Andreas again and have another crack at that final mission.

"Hey," I thought to myself, "this game is a clunky, dated piece of shit!" And indeed it is. They've been using the same engine for what, four or five years now? They're just patching it up to add new functionality to the game, shit like eating and working out that actually adds nothing to the gameplay but looks good on paper.

Not to mention the missions are frustrating as all hell. I like a challenge, I really do. I don't mind retrying something multiple times as long as it continues to be fun (see: TrackMania). But god damn it, I am tired of playing 2/3 of the way through a particularly bitchy mission and then dying due to something stupid that was a really dumb design decision to begin with!

It's just not an efficient engine, either. It looks kind of shitty compared to other games of the same era, but for some reason does not run nearly as smoothly. That might be due to the fact that the game has to process a bunch of pedestrians and stuff, but it seems to me that if they've been using this engine for five years they would have figured out how to use it as efficiently as possible. Although I guess they were busy coding the new shoot-head-off-civilian-with-shotgun engine everyone's talking about.

It's also really unnecessary to say "nigga" every ten seconds.

[Ice Cream Jonsey]

Not to mention the missions are frustrating as all hell. I like a challenge, I really do. I don't mind retrying something multiple times as long as it continues to be fun (see: TrackMania). But god damn it, I am tired of playing 2/3 of the way through a particularly bitchy mission and then dying due to something stupid that was a really dumb design decision to begin with!

We had a huge thread about the save system (among other things) when Vice City came out and the thread featured the absolute best troll job anyone has ever performed upon me by Pinback. I think the thread is in the best of base. What he did there to me is absolutely masterful. The man went out and got a new IP address so my dirty phpBB tricks wouldn't work.

I (still) agree with you, though about the save system.

I bought GTA:SA when it first came out for the PS2, but I put it on eBay a week or so later. I realized that I still hated the save system and that I just didn't have it in me to play the game regularly. I agree with you - I don't mind doing a level over again if it is fun. I mean, the whole genre of "arcade games" is proof positive that it can work. The GTA games just make you repeat tiresome stuff and the tragedy is that they don't have to design their game that way. They would still sell approximately four billion copies of their games, even if they did let you save anywhere.

I am hesitant to discern if they fixed things with the game "Bully." I have heard good things, but for all I know these good things are lies by people who don't mind repetitive tasks and play what they're told. Well, let's be honest, I just haven't had fifty spare bucks to go get the game, and I haven't rented any console games since we signed up for Netflix. I don't want to make it seem like I am lurking behind lamp posts with bated breath while biting down on my fist, trying to eliminate hysterics and worry about this Bully game.

On the other hand, going on a rampage and attempting to kill as many cops as possible is still some of the best five minutes o' gaming going. I shouldn't front: if I sat in front of any GTA game I'd be instantly blowing away a hundred cops and loving it. Like riding a bike, it's just something you never forget. Also like riding a bike, I'll never forget that you are forced to do just motherfucking that at the beginning of GTA:SA, making it possibly the worst decision in the whole of humanity except for the invevitable one China makes in two weeks regarding their satellite laser.

[Lysander]

I prefer Destroy All Humans! because the depth of comedy that can be created by the chain reactions inherrent in huge explosions and telekinetically throwing tanks everywhere is much more viserally satisfying than a submachinegun spree. Also, the comments in the brainscans turn what woudl be an incredibly boring and repative task into one that's only disappointingly necessary. It stillhhas similar tesign issues to GTA, but they're not as serious as the GTA games because the missions are much shorter, for hte most part. Lots of unfortunate cosmetic issues though.

[AArdvark]

Try Mafia. It's a little classier than GTA, although it's set in the 1930's. Can't save as often as one would like to but it's a fun romp through the city anyway. Iv'e been playing it even after I beat the game because the driving is way cool.


THE
SCREE SCREE
AARDVARK

[hygraed]

You know what would be nice? A checkpoint save system within missions. For example, on the final mission you have to fight your way through four floors of gangsters. Giving you the option to save after each floor, so if you died you wouldn't have to go through the whole thing again, would be awesome. It wouldn't really be abusable, but it would certainly reduce a lot of the frustration inherent in GTA's missions.

[co]

I've been enjoying Driver: Parallel lines. A lot like GTA except a little more realistic in that cops will start chasing you just for speeding or running a red light in front of them. Plus it's set in a fairly well done NYC.

[hygraed]

Also, GTA:SA's save system is bad, but it's nowhere near as bad as GTA2's. GTA2 had one save point on the whole map, and you basically had to remember where it was since there was no actual map feature. It also cost $50,000 to save, and you would still have your previous wanted level when you reloaded.

GTA2 was awesome in pretty much every other way, though.

[Worm]

I warezed GTA:SA and used god mode on any mission I couldn't complete on the third try. Whatever, I hope DMC and Godhand catch on more than this steal a car shit.

[hygraed]

Casual Observer's recommendation of Driver: PL made me go and check out what Driver games there are for PC (I don't own any consoles). Turns out the original Driver is my only option, as my PC doesn't meet the minimum requirements for Driv3r. So I got on Direct2Drive and bought it for ten bucks.

Oh God, what a horrible waste of ten dollars. The save system is even worse than GTA's: you can't even save between every mission! You have to do several in a row! What genius came up with that???