Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
Luke
04 May, 2008

Roundtable: Has GTA IV lived up to the hype?

360 Feature | Our staff and readers deliver their verdict.
On Tuesday the 29th of April Rockstar Games released Grand Theft Auto IV simultaneously on the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3. Prior to the release of Grand Theft Auto IV the hype for the game was at an all time high, with near perfect review scores, as well as early estimates that Grand Theft Auto IV will completely obliterate sales records.

Even though Grand Theft Auto IV has been released, we're still hearing plenty about the game. Whether it's from the excited gamers who are playing through the single player campaign or if it's the cries from those trying to get a multiplayer game going on Xbox Live or the PlayStation Network, it's clear that we're going to be hearing about the game for a long time to come.

Before we deliver our verdict on the game (which is set for tomorrow), we thought we would ask a few of our staff and our forum members a simple question: has Grand Theft Auto IV lived up to the hype?


Daniel Golding - PALGN Staff Writer

Well, I'd argue that at least the hype has lived up to the hype. GTA IV has to be the best-received game I've seen since I began reading game reviews. Near uniform 100% scores aren't exactly usual in this industry, and with terms like 'flawless', 'masterpiece' and 'best game of all time' being thrown around, you'd be excused for thinking that you'd be best off buying GTA IV and ignoring all other releases for the next few years. I think we've reached a point now where we can huff and puff all we like about the great things in GTA, of which there are undoubtedly too many to count, but there are always two sides of the coin. GTA IV certainly has some negatives that would be easy to miss if you were just going by the reviews alone.

GTA IV has not reinvented the wheel. It has perfected it, and made it incredibly smooth, but the basic gameplay flow hasn't really changed much from prior iterations. The controls, as improved as they are over the previous games, are really still not perfect, and can be a little clunky at times. A few gameplay mechanics are outdated, too: the health system and checkpoint-saving are hang-overs from the era where GTA made its name. Much has been made about the game's realism, but really, how real is any game where you can speed dangerously past police without them batting an eye?

There has also been some quiet, but determined criticism of the game's morality within gaming circles. While we all expect that the usual ruckus will arise about GTA in the mainstream press, there have been a few gaming voices raised in relation to the game's treatment of women in particular, with one well-known gaming website pulling a video promoting the in-game slaughter of prostitutes after complaints. We all know that GTA is essentially a set of tools, and the decision to use those tools rests with the player; but why, oh why, are we getting huge slabs of uncritical praise when there are actual issues here to be discussed?


What some people may have to do to shopkeepers if the game sells out*
*Note, we do not endorse this.

What some people may have to do to shopkeepers if the game sells out*
*Note, we do not endorse this.
Close

Luke Mitchell - PALGN Staff Writer

I've played through and completed all of the GTA games since day one (apart from maybe one or two of the 'spin-off' PSone and PSP games), and the game absolutely deserves the hype that it's been getting, being built on a foundation of solid titles for many years now. Rockstar have always delivered an intense and satisfying game world and, it's safe to say, GTA IV is no different.

The weather and chronological transformations look gorgeous and the citizens seem to live and breathe just like we do. Factor in the amount of detail in everything from the always-hilarious radio stations and TV channels to the often time-consuming bowling and pool mini games, and there are plenty of 'wow' moments, where you'll just want to sit back and take in the amazing experience in front of you. But really, GTA has done this for a few years now; while the world Rockstar has created here is certainly one worth playing in, skeptics are going to argue, quite simply, that it's just more of the same basic game.

And, let's not argue: it is. You come to the town as a nobody, and build yourself into a somebody by getting involved with some caricature-like mobsters each with a different goal, and there are all kinds of twists and turns along the way in the narrative. More importantly though, you'll drive, you'll shoot and you'll drive and shoot at the same time, all the while evading the police that are constantly arriving at the most inopportune moments.

Where GTA IV thrives though, is that all of the updates and additions to the gameplay, combined with the obvious graphical upgrade, makes the game one of the most enthralling and entertaining experiences ever created. The amount of time you can lose just hanging out in Liberty City is ridiculous, and that's without getting involved in any of the several multiplayer modes that are at your disposal. Yes, there are flaws. Nothing is perfect, after all... but make no mistake: GTA IV is the ultimate open-world experience - hell, at this point, it's probably the ultimate gaming experience.


Kimberley Ellis - PALGN Staff Writer

Being a longtime fan of Rockstar's work, I came into the latest iteration of Grand Theft Auto IV with many high expectations, and by large the game has not disappointed me.

While previous titles in the series have largely focused on its title character's tale of one man's rise from the bottom to the top, it's the social aspect of GTA IV, and its ability to get you inside the mind of Niko that is constantly compelling me to not put down my controller.

Through his interactions with friends, potential girlfriends and his cousin Roman, we see more side to Niko than any character that Rockstar has ever created. Niko feels more like a flesh-and-blood human being than just a mass of pixels and textures on screen, as he comments on his feelings and though processes making us look at him more than just a man with a gun, but making us think about the moral complications that the character too is feeling.

This also leads into the game world itself. For the first time in my experience, I feel as if I am alongside a character. Living and breathing amongst the many citizens of Liberty City. While I've spent many bleary-eyed nights with this game I am not ashamed to say that I have hardly even scratched the surface of the missions on offer, instead I am content to explore Niko's world. From the seedy bars and project housing to the glitzy part of town, you really get a sense of the cultural aspects at play in the game. Rockstar has really breathed life into this city, and it's definitely an experience that everyone should try.

Multiplayer is another touted aspect of the game that has me thoroughly excited. As a player of mods such as Multi Theft Auto, I, like many other GTA aficionados have craved for the chance to experience the world of GTA in a multiplayer. While many have filled their hours with the deathmatch modes, I have been gathering a couple of friends and cruising the streets of Liberty City, letting time pass me by. Like other sandbox titles such as Crackdown, the free roam mode provides countless hours of fun that you really need to experience with a few mates. Whether it's doing burnouts in the car park of the Burger Shot or trying to push each other off tall buildings, there is a lot of good times to be had roaming the streets of Liberty City.

On the other hand, I am disappointed to say that the clunky control system at times pulls me out of the game's immersion and frustrates me to no end as I have often found myself ploughing into a group of pedestrians or knocked out by an angry cabby due to the fiddly system that has been employed.

That said, the good far outweighs the bad and Rockstar should indeed be riding the high that this much-hyped title so welcomely deserves.


Niko, easily the most involving character in a GTA title yet.

Niko, easily the most involving character in a GTA title yet.
Close

Harry Milonas - PALGN Staff Writer

An ominous-sounding Niko once uttered, "Things will be different". If he was subtly speaking on the critical effects of a perfectly orchestrated hype machine, Mr. Bellic needs to find a new publicist.

Daniel hits the proverbial nail on its cranium. A shameful amount of time has been wasted on the seemingly indisputable grandstanding of additions and refinements to the GTA formula. And how. Bigger, better, faster, stronger, is certainly the Daft Punkish mantra of Grand Theft Auto IV. Had it been any other medium, the exhaustive, arguably unconcentrated design would negate more than it brings to the questionable critic's table. If anything, the hype behind GTA IV demonstrates once again how ridiculously broken the review system of this overenthusiastic enthusiast industry really is.

Sorry, folks. No game 'deserves its hype', nay 'lives up' to it. All those trailer countdowns; all that marketing money; all the frightening number of underage unboxing videos on YouTube -- indeed, all the 'perfect tens' in the world don’t mean any species of fecal matter if all we’re doing is raving on a laundry list of franchise upgrades. Grand Theft Auto IV isn't a 'perfect' game. It's not the 'best game ever', nor the 'best game yet', and it certainly won't change your life. It's hilarious, it's hip, it's disgusting, and it’s disturbing, with a mastery of the sociocultural -- both inside and outside the game -- second to none. It’s also still predictable, still padded, still needlessly frustrating, and still embraces an overall disconnection between the various facets of its world. But now I’m starting to sound formulaic too.

Of course, none of this matters in the slightest. You already made your mind up about buying the game the second you sent Officer Tenpenny to an early grave. We should be content as glorified mathematicians, justifying our arbitrary end scores for the faith of our validating readerships, PR monkeys and the four-year interim between a 'real' GTA game. Perhaps asking for anything more than blind hyperbolic fellation is asking too much of any videogame review, let alone 'critic'. Our EXCLUSIVEly anxious reviews mean ever so much, years from now, when the truly versed critiques of GTA IV finally come to light -- in unbridled anticipation of the next Grand Theft Auto, naturally.

Videogame hype, as always, is fleeting. 'Videogame journalism' is, unfortunately, forever.


Liberty City is a beautiful backdrop.

Liberty City is a beautiful backdrop.
Close

Next we thought we'd ask our forum members whether Grand Theft Auto IV has lived up to the hype, or whether they'll be heading back to the store to demand a refund.


Shannon - PALGN Forum Member

Going into this game, I was completely open minded. As with any other GTA game, you can only imagine what the game will be like based on little tidbits of information given by previews and interviews.

I didn’t expect this game to be revolutionary, I didn’t expect it to set a new standard for graphics. I expected it to be a game that I could play for hours on end while still wanting to play more after putting the controller down.

I’m 30 hours into the game, and still loving every minute of it, the story is great, the many little touches Rockstar have added to the game are all brilliant. I honestly can’t say that I wish that there was more in this game, or that something needs to be picked.

This game is just about as close to it gets to perfect. I’d be lying if I said that it didn’t outdo every single one of the previous GTAs.

It may not be the creation of a new genre, it may not have best graphics to ever be displayed, but it’s the best of its kind by years, and its that damn good, I’m failing to visualise, how Rockstar are going to improve on it.

This game got loads of hype and it deserved every little bit of it and then some.


Passa - PALGN Forum Member

Before GTA IV, I had never really played a GTA game before besides two or three of the opening missions. I consistently found the series uninteresting and overrated, in particular the awful characters, storyline and gunplay. I naturally assumed I wouldn’t be interested in purchasing GTA IV, ignoring all media prior to its release. I only decided to get it when I heard that the three biggest gripes I had with previous iterations in the series were fixed.

Four days after purchasing the game, I can wholeheartedly say it is one of the greatest games I have ever played. My first impressions were not as positive – it initially felt like any old GTA game, but as time went on I realised just how rich, detailed and involving the game world was. The game seems to have no limitations, every fifteen minutes you discover something new in the game you didn’t know existed. Between the in-game television, internet, radio, individually named streets, interactive diversions (bowling, darts, pool etc) and the cellphone, you’ll be blown away.

From a technical side of things, the game also succeeds. The graphics are incredible considering the scope of the game and the multiplayer is surprisingly fun and doesn’t feel tacked on at all. It has a few issues at the moment (that can be easily worked out with a patch) but you can’t help but sit back and marvel at the game when you’re playing with 15 other people roaming around freely in Liberty City together. Almost definitely GOTY, and quite possibly one of the greatest games of all time.


Take the boat for a ride. Go on, you'll love it.

Take the boat for a ride. Go on, you'll love it.
Close

Capoeira - PALGN Forum Member

I’ve never been so hyped for a game than I was for GTA IV.

The month leading up to it was nigh on unbearable for me especially considering the amount of previews hitting the net during that time, continually heaping praise upon the game. It was hard not to be caught up in it all and I think it’s fair to say that by the time the game was finally in our hands, expectations were at inordinate levels.

For me to finally play the game, going in with such an attitude, and still have it completely blow me away hopefully speaks volumes about how monumental an achievement GTA IV turned out to be. I played a dangerous game letting the overwhelming wave of hype consume me but however reckless that may have been, it was ultimately inconsequential.

GTA IV utterly obliterated the astronomical pressure that was placed upon it by the media and legions of rabid fans by delivering one of the most engaging gaming experiences to grace our consoles. It’s still very much ‘GTA’ but anyone who was up late at night, scrounging message boards and gaming sites for the latest scraps of info on the game never, ever wanted anything else.

GTA IV absolutely lives up to the hype and delivers beyond even that.


There we have it. We'd like to thank Passa, Shannon and Capoeira for their participation. Check back to PALGN tomorrow for our review of Grand Theft Auto IV.

Related Grand Theft Auto IV Content

GTA IV receives multiplayer focused patch
24 Jun, 2008 Exploits and connectivity issues targeted.
GTA IV sells 8.5 million
06 Jun, 2008 That's a lot of copies in about six weeks.
GTA IV cut details emerge
24 May, 2008 So, what's missing from our version?
24 Comments
1 year ago
Surely a verdict on any connection between reality and the hype can't be delivered until the hype has died down, which it clearly hasn't yet.
1 year ago
Dead on Spanca. I'd put it to everybody in that article, have you actually finished the game yet?

The game rocks and the amount, effort and polish that Rockstar put into the game clearly shines through. I'm not sure I'm happy with it taking the number one game of all time though.

GTA is GTA though. It's like Zelda for Nintendo fanboys. Put anything in front of them and they'll lap it up regardless.
1 year ago
Loved what Harry had to say personally, he put it very well.
Congrats to Passa and Capoiea on making it in.
1 year ago
My verdict:

It's no San Andreas. Which itself was no GTA1. It's sitting rather nicely as "third favourite GTA game" right now.
1 year ago
I guess I find myself in the same position as Passa; new to the series, not 100% comfortable with sandbox gameplay yet (mainly the fact that I find the objectives don't seem very important, but maybe that's just me), yet I'm blown away by the sheer amount of stuff on the disc.

I can only assume that Euphoria really is the engine it's hyped up to be, because there's clearly no room for animations left of the disc, yet the game feels more real than any game to date. It's not like havoc - havoc is merely bringing inanimate objects to life. Euphoria makes everything in this game breathe. The cutscenes are excellent, the missions inventive, and the gameplay varied. While I know I'll have to work on getting myself comfortable with the style of gameplay, I know it will be worth the effort.

My issue really boils down to the fact that I am a perfectionist, and I don't want to do the same missions over and over again in an attempt to perfect them (or to finish then in the first place; sometimes the controls have made it pretty hard for me). That said, once I start to "live a little", I'm sure I'll be sucked right in and will probably devote FAR too much time to this offering from R*.

Oh, and in the end I got the 18+ version through ebay. Arrived on friday, so no complaints there. icon_biggrin.gif
1 year ago
Great game, but certainly not perfect. No game could be labelled as such.
TIP: Don't play on an CRT SDTV, you'll get headaches from trying to see through the shadows and reading the tiny text!
1 year ago
GTAIV in my opinion, is one of those rarities - that reviewers should not become too hyper-critical about the flaws because they can develop a mentality that the game is much less than it is. My opinion? I've probably never had more fun in a game than I have in GTAIV. Sure, it's not technically perfect, and I acknowledge its flaws, but it wouldn't stop me labelling it 10/10.

This is the one time where I will say to the Gamespots and the IGNs (and PALGNs, even) to sit back, lap it up, and don't be afraid to follow the hype and give the game a perfect score. The success of GTA lies in the fact that it is constantly entertaining, but still actually a long game. For every 5 minutes of perfection in Final Fantasy VII, there's always 55 minutes of annoying drudgery. Who said there was anything wrong with refining a formula most thought was already perfect?
1 year ago
The Brett wrote
This is the one time where I will say to the Gamespots and the IGNs (and PALGNs, even) to sit back, lap it up, and don't be afraid to follow the hype and give the game a perfect score. The success of GTA lies in the fact that it is constantly entertaining, but still actually a long game. For every 5 minutes of perfection in Final Fantasy VII, there's always 55 minutes of annoying drudgery. Who said there was anything wrong with refining a formula most thought was already perfect?
Took the words right out of my mouth. If you're reviewing GTA as a piece of entertainment (which it is) then it's near perfect IMO. If you're being a nasty pedant determined to pick apart flaws for the sake of it, then it may not be perfect, but that's not what it intended to do. It's not the product of a bunch of personality-devoid engineers.
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
Surely a verdict on any connection between reality and the hype can't be delivered until the hype has died down, which it clearly hasn't yet.
I was thinking this exact same thing actually but if the question is being asked right now, you answer with what you've got icon_wink.gif

Regardless of the timing, this game has legs. I could boot up San Andreas right now and still have fun with it. What's it been now? 4 years since it came out? And GTA IV is clearly a better game than any of it's predecessors so I've got the same high hopes that four years down the track, I'll still fondly look back on it.
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
The Brett wrote
This is the one time where I will say to the Gamespots and the IGNs (and PALGNs, even) to sit back, lap it up, and don't be afraid to follow the hype and give the game a perfect score. The success of GTA lies in the fact that it is constantly entertaining, but still actually a long game. For every 5 minutes of perfection in Final Fantasy VII, there's always 55 minutes of annoying drudgery. Who said there was anything wrong with refining a formula most thought was already perfect?
Took the words right out of my mouth. If you're reviewing GTA as a piece of entertainment (which it is) then it's near perfect IMO. If you're being a nasty pedant determined to pick apart flaws for the sake of it, then it may not be perfect, but that's not what it intended to do. It's not the product of a bunch of personality-devoid engineers.
Then every game should be treated the same. Get rid of the 1000 word reviews and scores. All you need is a check box: "Is this game entertaining? Yes [] No []".
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
The Brett wrote
This is the one time where I will say to the Gamespots and the IGNs (and PALGNs, even) to sit back, lap it up, and don't be afraid to follow the hype and give the game a perfect score. The success of GTA lies in the fact that it is constantly entertaining, but still actually a long game. For every 5 minutes of perfection in Final Fantasy VII, there's always 55 minutes of annoying drudgery. Who said there was anything wrong with refining a formula most thought was already perfect?
Took the words right out of my mouth. If you're reviewing GTA as a piece of entertainment (which it is) then it's near perfect IMO. If you're being a nasty pedant determined to pick apart flaws for the sake of it, then it may not be perfect, but that's not what it intended to do. It's not the product of a bunch of personality-devoid engineers.
Harry's piece particularly irritated me. I've loved PALGN for years because it's always been the most partial, most hype-avoiding, most accurate and most unbiased review source. I've based countless purchases on the back of this site's praise. The only thing worse than being IGN is trying to be the anti-IGN for the sake of it. It's important for reviewers to be critical, but it HAS TO be in the context of the overall experience. The GTA series has always been more than the sum of its parts; if you break it down too much you're only doing yourself an injustice.
1 year ago
^ I liked the irony of Harry's piece, bemoaning the hype surrounding this (or any) game, within an article that was rushed out to pander to that very hype.

nikack wrote
Spanca wrote
The Brett wrote
This is the one time where I will say to the Gamespots and the IGNs (and PALGNs, even) to sit back, lap it up, and don't be afraid to follow the hype and give the game a perfect score. The success of GTA lies in the fact that it is constantly entertaining, but still actually a long game. For every 5 minutes of perfection in Final Fantasy VII, there's always 55 minutes of annoying drudgery. Who said there was anything wrong with refining a formula most thought was already perfect?
Took the words right out of my mouth. If you're reviewing GTA as a piece of entertainment (which it is) then it's near perfect IMO. If you're being a nasty pedant determined to pick apart flaws for the sake of it, then it may not be perfect, but that's not what it intended to do. It's not the product of a bunch of personality-devoid engineers.
Then every game should be treated the same. Get rid of the 1000 word reviews and scores. All you need is a check box: "Is this game entertaining? Yes [] No []".
Well no, there's varying degrees of entertainment. I would have thought that much was obvious. This is the exact thing I was talking about in another thread last week (Arbok's, on reviews, marketing and PR) about the lack of subjective appraisal in a review. Reviews of games are so often by numbers, evaluating how it looks in a quantitative manner, or how it sounds, or how long it lasts. How many film reviews do you read like that?
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
This is the exact thing I was talking about in another thread last week (Arbok's, on reviews, marketing and PR) about the lack of subjective appraisal in a review. Reviews of games are so often by numbers, evaluating how it looks in a quantitative manner, or how it sounds, or how long it lasts. How many film reviews do you read like that?
Whoa, best point i've read in a while.I think spanca is right here, it's the small things like this unwritten law that games must be broken down into categories and percentages and digits rather then having an objective across the board analysis.

It seems to serve the lowest common denominator, by providing a visual cue for whether or not the game is worth playing, by rating it in potatoes or thumbs up or some ****.With a more professional take on reviewing a game a more professional view of the medium might be taken by outsiders.

Ooh, and err........gta is great but, shock horror, is not the second coming of jesus that some sites will lead you to believe.It's a bit second rate to give a game like gta a perfect score, when another game, saints row, has done certain things that much better.While gta easily trumps SR in many areas, SE provided simple answers to problems that have plagued the gta series for a while now.Whether rockstar didn't believe their problems were so glaring they needed fixing or that they didn't want to acknowledge that saints row did so many things right by incorporating them into their own game, we'll never know.

I still believe zelda oot, at the time, to be a perfect example of a ten, it did everything right for it's time, and while with the benefit of hindsight we can look back at it now and pick it to pieces in comparison to other games that may have improved upon it's gameplay since, the point still remains these games came 'after' zelda, rather then the case with SR and gta, where SR came out before, and gta has stubbornly refused to incorporate certain gameplay evolutions into it's own game.It's hard to then in turn justify giving a game a perfect score, as good as it is, when obvious flaws are left unchecked.
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
^ I liked the irony of Harry's piece, bemoaning the hype surrounding this (or any) game, within an article that was rushed out to pander to that very hype.
I must take the blame for the rushed out part - I suggested to Luke that we needed something like this to keep the GTA coverage going over the weekend while the review was still being authored.

I totally understood the irony of dissecting the hype while feeding on it ourselves. It's not necessarily a bad thing thing, though. It captures the sentiment at the time of release. While we can look back on the event 6 months down the track, we need something to look back on.
1 year ago
James wrote
Spanca wrote
^ I liked the irony of Harry's piece, bemoaning the hype surrounding this (or any) game, within an article that was rushed out to pander to that very hype.
I must take the blame for the rushed out part - I suggested to Luke that we needed something like this to keep the GTA coverage going over the weekend while the review was still being authored.

I totally understood the irony of dissecting the hype while feeding on it ourselves. It's not necessarily a bad thing thing, though. It captures the sentiment at the time of release. While we can look back on the event 6 months down the track, we need something to look back on.
tbh, i thought the timing was perfect for a piece "living up to the hype" - in a way.

i mean, i think "living up to the hype" is all in the initial impressions, which is what most of us here are still running on (i'd hazard a guess that even 15 hours in, it's still the honeymoon period for the game). i guess i'm really drawing from the other hyped game: Halo 3. the hype was there, the initial impressions were pretty "meh".

however, i do think the actual "dissecting" can't be done right now, as it is, as Spanca said, a little too early to do so.

perhaps "Hype vs. First Impressions" would've been a better topic/definition for the piece.

still: good article.
1 year ago
The Brett wrote
Spanca wrote
The Brett wrote
This is the one time where I will say to the Gamespots and the IGNs (and PALGNs, even) to sit back, lap it up, and don't be afraid to follow the hype and give the game a perfect score. The success of GTA lies in the fact that it is constantly entertaining, but still actually a long game. For every 5 minutes of perfection in Final Fantasy VII, there's always 55 minutes of annoying drudgery. Who said there was anything wrong with refining a formula most thought was already perfect?
Took the words right out of my mouth. If you're reviewing GTA as a piece of entertainment (which it is) then it's near perfect IMO. If you're being a nasty pedant determined to pick apart flaws for the sake of it, then it may not be perfect, but that's not what it intended to do. It's not the product of a bunch of personality-devoid engineers.
Harry's piece particularly irritated me. I've loved PALGN for years because it's always been the most partial, most hype-avoiding, most accurate and most unbiased review source. I've based countless purchases on the back of this site's praise. The only thing worse than being IGN is trying to be the anti-IGN for the sake of it. It's important for reviewers to be critical, but it HAS TO be in the context of the overall experience. The GTA series has always been more than the sum of its parts; if you break it down too much you're only doing yourself an injustice.
I found it painful to read all the other pieces, yet Harry had the balls to say what needed to be said. No one is saying that the game is bad here, so don't run down PALGN for giving your new favourite game a few crosses. The argument is has GTAIV lived up to the hype, not is it a good game.

There's hype, and there's marketing.: this game was heavily marketed, the trailers awe inspiring, the tid bits of information made anyone squeal with anticipation. But did it live up to the hype? That's based on ones opinion. I'm not sure if the people answering the question for the article actually understood the question and thought about it. They answered with propaganda, give us a break, we have read enough praise for the game. Can we at least stand aside and answer the question without being bias?

I didn't let myself get hyped - the only thing I had really seen were the initial trailers showcasing the graphics. I avoided any news about the upcoming game, because I wanted the story to be fresh, new gameplay additions to be make me wow. I imagined that this game would be San Andreas x 100, being on next-gen consoles and what not.

I was not hyped by the outside. I had anticipated in my mind that the game was going to be so much better than San Andreas and it's predecessors.

In that respect I was disappointed. It went on a different tangent. There was no 'rise the ranks' or 'build an empire' aim to the game, it was a revenge story. Oh well, big deal. But It took things out of the previous games that had been slowly built up. In VC and SA money had a purpose, with the ability to buy buildings and what not. This time the most expensive outing you will have is a trip to Perveus for a suit. All the while, the story is telling you that Niko is doing his missions for money. The revenge side of things with tracking down Florian and Darko was extremely anti-climactic. The story was based on money earning and revenge, but I believe there was no purpose to any of it. I'd be sitting there having a riot of a time one minute, and the next shaking my head at the ridiculous plot.

I was at first not happy about the new driving physics, with a pretty steep learning curve. But once I got over that I think it just suits the game perfectly. The 'hide behind anything' was a nice addition. However I think once again they didn't quite get the shooting right. It seemed that every time an enemy hid, they would come out of cover at the same interval every time. You could almost kill them with your eyes shut if you timed their spurts of shooting correctly and waited for them to jump out every 3 seconds or whatever it was.

The AI is atrocious and anyone who disagrees is a fool. Standing still shooting spurts of 5 bullets then reloading is absurd, and hiding behind a crate and shooting at regular intervals is hardly groundbreaking. There are dozens and dozens of games with far better 'battle' AI than this. I mean, having 30 gangsters staggered in and around a dilapidated warehouse, just standing still is, was done way back in the original GTA days. Yet it seemed like every other mission this was pretty much the formula. But at the same time, that's what you expect. I didn't get the game for a dating sim, I wanted to kill, and kill a lot.

The story was great, but could have been better. For instance having more alternate storylines based on who you did or did not kill. Having a non-linear sandbox game would be pretty badass, you can't disagree with that.

The gameplay was great but there's always room for improvement with the AI and shooting system. Can you disagree with that?

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot praise for this game. I was engaged to it for the last week and couldn't put it down. I love it when blockbusters come along to keep me entertained for a long time, not these 'casual' games that seem to be the craze.

Where was I? Oh yeah, did it live up to the hype? **** no. Is it a good game? Hell yeah.
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
If you're being a nasty pedant determined to pick apart flaws for the sake of it, then it may not be perfect, but that's not what it intended to do. It's not the product of a bunch of personality-devoid engineers.
Spanca wrote
Reviews of games are so often by numbers, evaluating how it looks in a quantitative manner, or how it sounds, or how long it lasts. How many film reviews do you read like that?
I'm not sure if I'm missing your point here, Spanca, but these comments seem contradictory. You want game reviews to be less by-the-numbers, less 'consumer guide'-ish, yet picking apart the flaws of the game is being a 'nasty pedant'? I may have taken the second comment slightly out-of-context, and for that I apologise, but I think it's still illustrative of the bind that reviewers often seem to find themselves in.

The great Pauline Kael once wrote:

Pauline Kael wrote
The role of the critic is to help people see what is in the work, what is in it that shouldn't be, what is not in it that could be. He is a good critic if he helps people understand more about the work than they could see for themselves; he is a great critic, if by his understanding and feeling for the work, by his passion, he can excite people so that they want to experience more of the art that is there, waiting to be siezed.
Being content to analyse GTA IV as having a great open world mechanic, a great gunplay/cover system, a great living, breathing world alone is lazy criticism. Anyone who buys the game and plays it for more than ten minutes will immediately come to the same conclusions.

This is not to say we should be 'pedants' and pull apart an otherwise perfect game, looking for criticisms. I've heard some justify the possibility of extreme, sadistic, misogynist violence in GTA with the quite eloquent argument that the decision not to commit such violence only means anything if you have the possibility of actually doing the opposite. It's the same here. We must necessarily examine what the game doesn't do well in order to fully appreciate what it does do brilliantly. We must look beyond simple consumer-advice analysis in order to fully illustrate why the game is that good, and that necessarily requires a more-than-the-greatness analysis.

Anyway Spanca, I'm not sure I'm actually disagreeing with you here (in fact, I suspect we agree), but I thought this was something worth pointing out, while we are on the argument of the role of game criticism.
1 year ago
I agree with what Passa wrote - I'm constantly finding something new that just makes me love this game even more - For example, browsing the net in-game and finding a website about Eunux, the GTA equivalent of Linux, and pissing myself laughing reading about why they chose 'Sux the Sea Cucumber' as their mascot. The formula of the game itself is nothing new, but its all the new additions and updated graphics that are making me love this game more and more as I keep playing. It's certainly not a perfect game, but it's damn close to it.
1 year ago
Daniel Golding wrote
*wall of text*
The two positions you've attributed to me are essentially the same. Reviewing games from a quantitative approach, by the numbers, in a pedantic fashion to come up with a total score at the end of the day is not what I think we should be getting from 'professional' games journalists.

My favourite games 'reviews' are those done by the guys on the Totally Rad Show. They're far from 'pro' reviewers, but I find them to be the most reliable. They do them in exactly the same way as their movie reviews, with the 3 guys just sitting there discussing the game, what they did or didn't like, and the overall entertainment value of the game. Whilst there are discussions and comparisons of graphics and the like, there's no numbers or scores involved.
1 year ago
Personally I thought Super Mario Galaxy had more hype.
1 year ago
Maybe you should start going to more sites than just Vooks then.
1 year ago
lol ... I didn't even know what vooks was prior to going there today icon_smile.gif

I just think Galaxy was hyped more probably because it was hinted at being a launch title, then delayed a few months etc
1 year ago
I think they were pretty evenly Hyped on a whole, but for one reason or another you were exposed to SMG hype more than GTA hype. Outside of the internet though SMG and GTA I haven't heard talked about much and Halo 3's hype from what I experienced between irl and the internet was far larger than SMG or GTA combined. Once again though everyone does not live the same lives so we could never aggree on what was really most hyped. But I think a few people atleast would aggree that none of the 3 mentioned above lived up to the hype. For me though Hype means not how much I anticipate it but how crazy the media goes over it, as I try to avoid over anticipation for anything. Having said that I may have been a tiny bit over anticipating Halo 3.
1 year ago
The Brett wrote
Harry's piece particularly irritated me. I've loved PALGN for years because it's always been the most partial, most hype-avoiding, most accurate and most unbiased review source. I've based countless purchases on the back of this site's praise. The only thing worse than being IGN is trying to be the anti-IGN for the sake of it. It's important for reviewers to be critical, but it HAS TO be in the context of the overall experience. The GTA series has always been more than the sum of its parts; if you break it down too much you're only doing yourself an injustice.
In the context of the hubbub surrounding GTA IV's reviews, I can understand how some of my comments (lawl, "EXCLUSIVEly") may be seen as a direct jab at certain websites. I can only try and assure you Brett, they weren't meant as such. On the contrary, they were directed at the industry as a whole.

Look at almost any BIG NAME, heavily marketed videogame. Then look at the relation to our so-called 'games journalism' industry. Aside from the facts that a) we're crazy about numbers, thereby b) we're more often than not seen as extensions of the PR mouthpiece -- there's always an inherent rush of consumer-directed content that is almost always coupled with a quantitative over qualitative syndrome. Indeed, the very same 'breaking it down too much' mentality you decry.

So why does this happen? Because a publisher's PR wing isn't doing its job with bullet-point press releases? Because the people who have already decided on purchasing GTA IV aren't going to until they receive their day one dose of validation? Because the people oblivious and/or never fans of GTA in the first place are somehow going to change their tone after summarily reading "it's GTA, but with this and this but not this and this. So, PERFECT"? Because in a week's/month's/year's time all the copies of GTA IV will have grown legs and left the residence of your local games emporium?

Much like videogame design versus narratology, the writing and reporting aspect of this enthusiast industry has quite some balancing and maturing to do. Something I don't think will ever be fully achieved anytime soon, if ever. That said...

Spanca wrote
Reviews of games are so often by numbers, evaluating how it looks in a quantitative manner, or how it sounds, or how long it lasts. How many film reviews do you read like that?
Jibbs wrote
Whoa, best point i've read in a while.I think spanca is right here, it's the small things like this unwritten law that games must be broken down into categories and percentages and digits rather then having an objective across the board analysis.
I have a dream, Spanca and Jibbs. I have a dream. Then again, god help any publication's advertising revenue should I ever be given an executive editor's position.

In any case, cheers for the varied feedback on my particular piece in this roundtable folks.

Spanca wrote
^ I liked the irony of Harry's piece, bemoaning the hype surrounding this (or any) game, within an article that was rushed out to pander to that very hype.
Bitchacho wrote
I found it painful to read all the other pieces, yet Harry had the balls to say what needed to be said. No one is saying that the game is bad here, so don't run down PALGN for giving your new favourite game a few crosses. The argument is has GTAIV lived up to the hype, not is it a good game.
Actually, I'm both slightly surprised and relieved it went through the editing process untouched. Admittedly though, there was at least one part of it that understandably didn't make the director's cut. An image suggestion for the article, to be precise. If you know who GTA IV's Lola is -- along with her somewhat infamous lollypop-licking promotional artwork -- imagine an appropriately topical comment* placed below said image, for what I had in mind.

*Oooh, I just thought of another one! 'How many reviewer's licks does it take to get to the centre of a hypepop?' Eh? EH? Eh. Be keeping that one for Halo 4.
Add Comment
Like this feature?
Share it with this tiny url: http://palg.nu/Df

N4G : News for Gamers         Twitter This!

Digg!     Stumble This!

| More
  Pre-order or buy:
    PALGN recommends: www.Play-Asia.com

Australian Release Date:
  29/04/2008 (Confirmed)
Standard Retail Price:
  $119.95 AU
Publisher:
  Rockstar Games
Genre:
  Action
Year Made:
  2007

Read more...
Currently Popular on PALGN
Bioshock 2 Review
Welcome back to Rapture...
Win 1 of 10 Bioshock 2 packs
Includes free stuffs!
PALGN Weekly Releases - 08/02/10
Christmas in February?
Nier Preview
Nierly as dark and twisted as Drakengard.