• GTA V Next-Gen Trailer remade on GTA SA
    78 replies, posted
[QUOTE=RikohZX;45204445]Remember the days when it was considered one of the most advanced sandbox games possible at the time? 2004 was hell of a year with San Andreas, Halo 2, Half-Life 2...[/QUOTE] I have to say the years 2002-2005 are probably the best years in gaming ever, PC gaming was also much more acknowledged than now.
[QUOTE=J!NX;45206367]gta SA [t]SA image[/t] games that are "Being put to shame" I don't know what dimension you're living in but it must be one where we're still using the original xbox and ps2 that and new games just play better it was great for its time[/QUOTE] Are you really saying that San Andreas is less game than the Tomb Raider reboot or Dishonored or Battlefield 3 I hope you don't identify as a gamer
I literally put in hundreds of hours playing the campaign, freeroaming and SA:MP/MTA. San Andreas pretty much defined my childhood plus some.
[QUOTE=FlamingBlizza;45204280]The map in SA feels just so empty when looking back at it.[/QUOTE] To be honest I still enjoy SA's map much more, the diversity of having 3 different cities with different architecture and street designs was better than the single city and large stretches of empty country in GTA V
[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;45207792]Sort of off topic, but did you even look at the URL for that Half Life render? [URL]http://static.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1493/14930800/2496162-[/URL][B]hl2+udk+1.jpg[/B] It's not a HL2 screenshot, it's a recreation in a completely different engine.[/QUOTE] I thought it was extremely obvious? HL2 won game of the decade and was made in 2004, I'd have to be like 9 to not know [QUOTE=subenji99;45207995]Are you really saying that San Andreas is less game than the Tomb Raider reboot or Dishonored or Battlefield 3 I hope you don't identify as a gamer[/QUOTE] I don't even like Battlefield 3 but age is a big deal. Moving around and shooting is much much smoother in Battlefield than GTA SA, and the same goes for most current age games. This makes it feel much more natural to play. They can actually handle more. And GTA5 itself shows this. I'm not saying they're instantly better gta sa, but they're much more new than it, and with older games you can really feel the age. I loved the shit out of GTA SA but having played so many modern games it feels very clunky to me. if you play GTA SA today I garuntee it's going to feel a bit clunky to you too. Of course, it has mechanics that even today's games should have, but GTA 5 has a lot of that anyways. The idea that it "puts even todays games to shame" is silly, but it sure as fuck was amazing for its time.
[QUOTE=J!NX;45206367]gta SA [t]https://lh4.ggpht.com/5ztoNn5hG3iEegbSznA2ehmWRPlfIaL29VTN9JyJAms6DtoVjp41Rdqh_79j6WpCcrqw=h900[/t][t]http://www.ingame.de/files/2012/10/GTA-San-Andreas-Screenshot-01.jpg[/t] games that are "Being put to shame" [t]http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2013/07/GTA5-thumb.jpg[/t][t]http://oceanofgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Battlefield-3-free-download2.jpg[/t][t]http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1569231/dishonored-review-boat-1920.jpg[/t][t]http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/internaional/images/watch-dogs/watch-dogs-reflections-01-ultra-640px.jpg[/t][t]http://media1.gameinformer.com/imagefeed/screenshots/TombRaider/Base_Camp_3.jpg[/t][t]http://static.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1493/14930800/2496162-hl2+udk+1.jpg[/t][t]http://pxlbyte.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Super-Smash-Bros-Wii-U-Official-Screenshots-Nintendo-074.jpg[/t] I don't know what dimension you're living in but it must be one where we're still using the original xbox and ps2 that and new games just play better it was great for its time[/QUOTE] You actually convinced me that GTA SA puts most games today to shame.
[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;45210167]You actually convinced me that GTA SA puts most games today to shame.[/QUOTE] I hope you're just regarding tomb raider and Battlefield, because dishonored was definitely far from bad, and gta 5 is still GTA. and the "hl2 on a modern engine" image shows how much more powerful, graphically and by how much they can just render rather than by gameplay here are way better examples though [t]http://www.lightninggamingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Dark-Souls-2-E3-Screenshots-2-1024x576.jpg[/t][t]http://assets.vg247.com/current//2014/04/arkhamknight3.jpg[/t][t]http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121201013424/farcry/images/6/69/Far-Cry-3-hangglider.jpg[/t][t]http://cdn.highwinds.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/8190/ss_8d164f548b7861512aa6e13cd8d274098ade7e92.1920x1080.jpg?t=1387225431[/t][t]http://gamerlimit.com/files/2012/05/MP4.jpg[/t][t]http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/images/metro-last-light-1.png[/t][t]http://www.riftenabled.com/files/uploads/1367625794.jpg[/t] I'm not talking about the image itself, but the game itself. I picked those first 6 because I picked totally random games. but these ones, there is NO WAY gta SA could put them to shame actually, I just remembered what I forgot [t]http://www.dsogaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/next-car-game-2.jpg[/t] "next car game"
My only gripe is that GTA V's countryside wasn't nearly dense enough. The sprawling forests of SA was just an incredible feeling.
[QUOTE=KingKombat;45210206]My only gripe is that GTA V's countryside wasn't nearly dense enough. The sprawling forests of SA was just an incredible feeling.[/QUOTE] If they don't fix that in PC version I'll be annoyed to piss being able to feel the drama of a bike chase down a hill dodging death all the time would be great
[QUOTE=KingKombat;45210206]My only gripe is that GTA V's countryside wasn't nearly dense enough. The sprawling forests of SA was just an incredible feeling.[/QUOTE] Mount Chilliad in SA also seemed to be larger in magnitude and also the missing naval base in GTA V really bothers me. Also I feel too powerful on a fresh start of gta v compared to SA where you literally start from the cesspools of the ghetto on a bike. Also the rpg grinding aspect was also fun but I guess they added that to gta:o
[QUOTE=J!NX;45206367]gta SA [t]https://lh4.ggpht.com/5ztoNn5hG3iEegbSznA2ehmWRPlfIaL29VTN9JyJAms6DtoVjp41Rdqh_79j6WpCcrqw=h900[/t][t]http://www.ingame.de/files/2012/10/GTA-San-Andreas-Screenshot-01.jpg[/t] games that are "Being put to shame" [t]http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2013/07/GTA5-thumb.jpg[/t][t]http://oceanofgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Battlefield-3-free-download2.jpg[/t][t]http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1569231/dishonored-review-boat-1920.jpg[/t][t]http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/internaional/images/watch-dogs/watch-dogs-reflections-01-ultra-640px.jpg[/t][t]http://media1.gameinformer.com/imagefeed/screenshots/TombRaider/Base_Camp_3.jpg[/t][t]http://static.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1493/14930800/2496162-hl2+udk+1.jpg[/t][t]http://pxlbyte.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Super-Smash-Bros-Wii-U-Official-Screenshots-Nintendo-074.jpg[/t] I don't know what dimension you're living in but it must be one where we're still using the original xbox and ps2 that and new games just play better it was great for its time[/QUOTE] you can put a game to shame in other aspects not just graphically yknow sure, those games look better. but do they also have good characters? varied missions? do they REALLY "play better"? and if SA was great for its time, are these really as good as they could've been, considering how far we've come?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45211077]you can put a game to shame in other aspects not just graphically yknow sure, those games look better. but do they also have good characters? varied missions? do they REALLY "play better"? and if SA was great for its time, are these really as good as they could've been, considering how far we've come?[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure everyone in here is comparing the graphics of these games and the graphics only
[QUOTE=Leo Leonardo;45211122]I'm pretty sure everyone in here is comparing the graphics of these games and the graphics only[/QUOTE] well the guy he was quoting said nothing about graphics
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45211077]you can put a game to shame in other aspects not just graphically yknow sure, those games look better. but do they also have good characters? varied missions? do they REALLY "play better"? and if SA was great for its time, are these really as good as they could've been, considering how far we've come?[/QUOTE] if they were made in gta SA's time they'd be shit no doubt Dishonored and GTA 5 though are far better than BF3 and Tomb Raider. [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45211233]well the guy he was quoting said nothing about graphics[/QUOTE] I used shit examples in the end, see [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1404136&p=45210204&viewfull=1#post45210204[/url] I would post fallout new vegas in that post as well but the engine isn't really good at all
"Game released in 2004 not graphically, technically, or functionally as impressive as games from the new decade" Well no shit. I can't believe you still don't get it. These games aren't comparable - they can't be. And yet I have and I'll continue to remember CJ, Big Smoke, Ryder, Tenpenny, Woozie, The Truth, etc for years. I'll be lucky to remember Corvo by the end of this year. Lara Croft went from 'girl in wayyy over her head ' to 'empowered action heroine' in half an hour and I have no interest in that story. I don't think Jason Brody HAD a character. San Andreas clearly beats these games despite not being comparable. You get the idea, and that's just characterization. I could go into content or variety or small details or any number of other things. I repeat - if graphics and spectacle are all you care about, and you don't see any problem judging a game against games made in the future then you cannot consider yourself a real fan of video gaming culture. I will concede Deus Ex and if you had included it New Vegas - they both demonstrate the kind of passion SA did. But I emphasise - not comparable. How could you expect a game to compete with games that didn't exist yet?
[QUOTE=J!NX;45211266]if they were made in gta SA's time they'd be shit no doubt Dishonored and GTA 5 though are far better than BF3 and Tomb Raider. I would post fallout new vegas in that post as well but the engine isn't really good at all[/QUOTE] yeah but the point is effort. dishonored has cool visuals, but isn't it just another sneaking/assassination game, aka the biggest gimmick in the game industry right now? sure, smash bros is one of my favorite game franchises and i'm not gonna complain about another one getting released, but it's not exactly innovative at this point. hell, even gta v has plenty of issues with its characters and storytelling, despite being really fun. [quote]I used shit examples in the end, see [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1404136&p=45210204&viewfull=1#post45210204[/url][/quote] can't say i've played most of those games, but fc3 is really repetitive, and if jc2 is anything like the first one then the same complaint applies
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45211538]yeah but the point is effort. dishonored has cool visuals, but isn't it just another sneaking/assassination game, aka the biggest gimmick in the game industry right now? sure, smash bros is one of my favorite game franchises and i'm not gonna complain about another one getting released, but it's not exactly innovative at this point. hell, even gta v has plenty of issues with its characters and storytelling, despite being really fun. can't say i've played most of those games, but fc3 is really repetitive, and if jc2 is anything like the first one then the same complaint applies[/QUOTE] Dishonoroed "Just another sneaking game", I really don't get how you can say that, it's not exactly assassins creed you know. So you're saying Dishonored didn't have as much effort put into it? Effort doesn't = good game. You can put a decade of effort in a game into the time of 2 years and still get a 3/10 score at best. and gta5, even San Andreas has its issues you know. [QUOTE=subenji99;45211424]"Game released in 2004 not graphically, technically, or functionally as impressive as games from the new decade" Well no shit. I can't believe you still don't get it. These games aren't comparable - they can't be. And yet I have and I'll continue to remember CJ, Big Smoke, Ryder, Tenpenny, Woozie, The Truth, etc for years. I'll be lucky to remember Corvo by the end of this year. Lara Croft went from 'girl in wayyy over her head ' to 'empowered action heroine' in half an hour and I have no interest in that story. I don't think Jason Brody HAD a character. San Andreas clearly beats these games despite not being comparable. You get the idea, and that's just characterization. I could go into content or variety or small details or any number of other things. I repeat - if graphics and spectacle are all you care about, and you don't see any problem judging a game against games made in the future then you cannot consider yourself a real fan of video gaming culture. I will concede Deus Ex and if you had included it New Vegas - they both demonstrate the kind of passion SA did. But I emphasise - not comparable. How could you expect a game to compete with games that didn't exist yet?[/QUOTE] If all those games were released in 2004 with 2004 tech they probably would not do quite as well as SA, but my point kind of relies on the string of "it physically [I]feels [/I]better to play". Of course, many games today are still insanely good, I mean, it doesn't [I]have to[/I] be just those games. except gta 5 if something since gta 5 would be SA. Dark souls 1/2 and max payne 3 though to me are very memorable and amazing games. Same with Metro. However, they aren't open world cities. and totally shit example with, Tomb raider, the reboot is honestly not tomb raider. I liked it but to me it felt like Rambo: Vagina edition. But it was good fun still. and, I don't care that much about graphics. The games I like most are actually indie games. "realism" is pretty stupid a lot of the time.
I never played SA back in the day, people always told me I was missing out, so I tried a few years back. I didn't get in to it, all I played was the multiplayer with my cousins, the singleplayer felt boring to me, the controls are really bad on the PC version, and the missions felt boring. I also couldn't care less about the characters. Honestly, it must have been awesome when it came out, but today it really doesn't hold up that much for me.
I've played SA so much on my old xbox that I needed to buy a new copy of the game twice. After many hours they just don't want to run anymore.
[QUOTE=J!NX;45212229]Dishonoroed "Just another sneaking game", I really don't get how you can say that, it's not exactly assassins creed you know. So you're saying Dishonored didn't have as much effort put into it? Effort doesn't = good game. You can put a decade of effort in a game into the time of 2 years and still get a 3/10 score at best. and gta5, even San Andreas has its issues you know. [/quote] i know dishonored isn't just another AC. but that doesn't mean that sneaking and assassination isn't an overdone cliche in videogames. and yes, of course gta v has issues. but can you name a gta v character that's as memorable as big smoke? ryder? tenpenny? [quote]If all those games were released in 2004 with 2004 tech they probably would not do quite as well as SA, but my point kind of relies on the string of "it physically [I]feels [/I]better to play". Of course, many games today are still insanely good, I mean, it doesn't [I]have to[/I] be just those games.[/quote] your point relies on something subjective then
Regardless of how well it's aged, watching the video made me want to play San Andreas.
Whats the music in the trailer, it sounds funky.
When I first spawned into the huge dense country of San Andreas for the first time in SA:MP on a stunting server, I had no idea where the hell I was. I hadn't even gotten the general basis of where I was until I started to ride around on a bicycle. Even then, on singleplayer, when I had first passed the series of missions solely based in Los Santos for the very first time, I had been completely shocked beyond anything else that there was MORE than Los Santos. I felt amazed, like there was just so much to explore and see. I just felt like it was a perfect concoction of discovery, mood and wonder about everything, and it hadn't been the first time I had experienced that with a GTA game. Hell, even in IV when I first crossed over into Star Junction I was amazed to see all the neon signs and clutters of traffic all around with such lively streets and everything.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45212489]i know dishonored isn't just another AC. but that doesn't mean that sneaking and assassination isn't an overdone cliche in videogames. and yes, of course gta v has issues. but can you name a gta v character that's as memorable as big smoke? ryder? tenpenny? your point relies on something subjective then[/QUOTE] I meant even San Andreas has its issues. San Andrea may have amazing characters but so does a lot of games. Hell, Brothers: A tale of two sons is probably the best story telling I've seen in a game. SA is amazing but it definitely doesn't put today games to shame. also, How can you call that subjective when you call sneaking and assassination overdone? when a game physically feels better, it responds to how you play better, and it runs better, it plays better. It feels more natural in response to your hand movements. It's easier to be immersed. When a game is older it doesn't get that as easily, the age becomes more obvious, unless you get something like what doom has (a mod that lets you use the mouse and more) it'll feel off. Driving, no matter how good it is for its time in SA, will be soured by games that are newer and can do it better. story line though, that's completely different, you can have an amazing or funny story even on a game as small as the first zelda or battleblocks theater, or Brothers, or have unforgettable characters like GTASA
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45212489]i know dishonored isn't just another AC. but that doesn't mean that sneaking and assassination isn't an overdone cliche in videogames. and yes, of course gta v has issues. but can you name a gta v character that's as memorable as big smoke? ryder? tenpenny? your point relies on something subjective then[/QUOTE] so if a game is a sneaky game, by your definition, it's just not very good and isn't as good as a game like GTA SA objectively?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;45214090]so if a game is a sneaky game, by your definition, it's just not very good and isn't as good as a game like GTA SA objectively?[/QUOTE] Overdone clich'e can still be good. He's not calling it bad, he's just saying it's "Not exactly a new thing" Military shooters have been done to death but there are plenty that people seem to absolutely adore.
[QUOTE=ThePunisher1;45212621]Whats the music in the trailer, it sounds funky.[/QUOTE] It's "From Nowhere" by Dan Croll Baardsen Remix (The one heard in the trailer): [video=youtube;FtXhO38BBzU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtXhO38BBzU[/video] And the original version: [video=youtube;973ibay5504]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=973ibay5504[/video]
[QUOTE=J!NX;45213883]I meant even San Andreas has its issues. San Andrea may have amazing characters but so does a lot of games. Hell, Brothers: A tale of two sons is probably the best story telling I've seen in a game. SA is amazing but it definitely doesn't put today games to shame.[/quote] the point is effort, though. you could say certain modern games are better or worse, but either way, do they have as much effort put into them? rockstar put a lot of effort into making gta v look better, for example, but character development is half assed and it's almost like there's a big chunk of franklin's story missing. [quote]also, How can you call that subjective when you call sneaking and assassination overdone?[/quote] because whether or not something has been done a lot isn't subjective. i guess whether or not it has been OVERdone is, but you get my point [quote]Driving, no matter how good it is for its time in SA, will be soured by games that are newer and can do it better.[/quote] but at the time of SA's release, driving physics and controls were already well-established in videogames, though. everything made from that point on is different, not better or worse [editline]26th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;45214090]so if a game is a sneaky game, by your definition, it's just not very good and isn't as good as a game like GTA SA objectively?[/QUOTE] no?
Talking about GTA SA having amazing characters and stories is weird when (to me) Vice City had such a tighter plot and characters which was way more enjoyable and memorable. I remember tons of the characters from Vice City, when in SA the only reason I remember certain people is because of the internet and overuse of certain lines. I also really enjoyed GTA V's story, but also not as amazing as Vice City.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;45214651]the point is effort, though. you could say certain modern games are better or worse, but either way, do they have as much effort put into them? rockstar put a lot of effort into making gta v look better, for example, but character development is half assed and it's almost like there's a big chunk of franklin's story missing. because whether or not something has been done a lot isn't subjective. i guess whether or not it has been OVERdone is, but you get my point but at the time of SA's release, driving physics and controls were already well-established in videogames, though. everything made from that point on is different, not better or worse [editline]26th June 2014[/editline] no?[/QUOTE] So because SA had effort put into it, its a good game? Obviously effort is everything there is to quality but just because "Oh this had more effort put into it than X" means nothing at all. In fact, you know, the fact that gta 5 runs so insanely well and has so much content in in despite the hardware anyone could easily say they put as much, if not much more effort into it. You're saying that because [I]you[/I] don't find the characters memorable it seems as if they didn't put as much effort into it. isn't that like, your opinion? And there are more things to a game than characters, albeit it has many flaws and they had to cut a lot of corners because of said hardware, it's a game that's made them tons of money. Look at how you can change and control characters in GTA5, it's the most fun I've had in a game for a long time. Not perfect, but they got it right. It's magic. that doesn't even make any sense at all you know what else had a lot of effort put into it? [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Too_Human.jpg[/t] or even better yet (To clarify, I'm not saying GTA SA is DNF, I'm saying "Having more a little more effort put into a game than another" doesn't instantly mean it'll be good. SA is definitely another world compared to DNF) [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/DukeNukemForever.jpg[/t] Guess how that turned out. Just because Jill put effort on studying for an exam for John doesn't, does not mean Jill is going to do better or get more answers right. [QUOTE]everything made from that point on is different, not better or worse[/QUOTE] CPU's have been able to run better and better physics simulations in games allowing for better and better driving mechanics. We haven't "Halted technologically". [video=youtube;x_nBG6ZSC-o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_nBG6ZSC-o[/video] [video=youtube;G7Qka1ltDKE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7Qka1ltDKE[/video] the difference isn't going to just be in graphics in this example (lets ignore that). sure one may feel different for the other but games are far more able to make the driving actually feel natural. Hitting things feels way more natural. I've not played next car game but that isn't the only game with improved car physics out there. Hell, I don't even think you can use a controller on the PC version of San andreas. Not when I tried it at least. Joysticks and driving are a big deal. I've not played it in a while but can't even aim your shots like in gta4 while in a car. it's old so you can't blame it but this can make it feel much worse than a newer game, even if you are using a controller. [QUOTE]because whether or not something has been done a lot isn't subjective. i guess whether or not it has been OVERdone is, but you get my point[/QUOTE] totally fair, the reason people still give a shit about doom 1 20 years from its release is because was [I]the[/I] first person shooter. There are arguably games today that are a billion times better but it has that charm to it that can't be forgotten. same with a game like Dues Ex 1. 10 years from now people will still care about GTA SA and play it because it's just that good of a game. And they should care, it's something that hasn't been done that much doing its time. Of course, same will probably happen for gta 4 and 5, who knows.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.