Zero Punctuation: Grand Theft Auto 5

[heroicbob]

I personally don't like people comparing GTA and SR anymore. Yeah at one point they were quite similar, but they've gone down two distinct paths that Yahtzee himself understands: parody/satire vs. reference. SR cranked up the wacky and geek meta-gaming to try and be as fun as possible, but completely forgot how to make a game challenging. GTA keeps the game challenging and makes you getting away with your crimes a lofty goal, and sends a message by basically satirizing the era and location the game's in every time... which isn't nearly as mindlessly fun.

I think people don't have to like both series, in fact I think the two are polarizing enough now that it would be hard to like both without being new enough to games to create some personal biases. Currently I like GTA more but that could change in later games. It's hard not to assume Rockstar is just trying harder, but that's also because they have a mountain of cash to spend on the GTA series. I don't blame anyone for liking one more than the other, including Yahtzee... but I'm playing the one I enjoy more personally.

i would disagree that this games challenging you can pretty much win every firefight by just tapping the aim button and letting the auto aim home in on every enemy also Franklins slow motion driving power makes things pretty easy too

 

[MB202]

Oh gosh, I laughed out loud with the sumo wrestler running gag! XD

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

1. I do love the SR series but I'll be the first to point out the glaring paradigm shift between SR2 and 3&4. Beginning with 3 it almost felt like playing with cheat codes on, and 4 is in no way better. In fact is a worse offender in that. And the humor is low-brow enough to the point where its not even funny anymore. It can be fun at times but only in that I can create my own fun with it, the actual game itself is so way out beyond "meh" I don't have words for it.
2. In comparison, as a more solid story GTA V is a winner. I actually feel something towards the characters, even if I don't always like them. I'm of the mind that there's no game with a perfect plot, and GTA does fall short of that mark, but not as bad as the SR series which abandoned any semblance of plot in favor of B-rate Tromafilm tripe. Which yes, I do like but not all the time.
3. Yahtzee seems to be phoning it in these days, I've rarely watched ZP because of that. I almost didn't watch this one, and really it feels almost like I didn't anyway... Rinse and repeat. Maybe Yahtzee should take a month or two off.

 

[gjkbgt]

Escaped take note:
This is how you give "bad" review properly.
The reason that the 3.5/5 score went down so badly was. You said that you didn't like the game because, you thought the characters were "Bad people"
And found the city filled with unlikable, shallow picks.
Forgetting that's the point of GTA showing us horrible people everywhere. Then letting us blow them up.

Badly written and inconstant. They try to do this but it fails because this.

There! I know why you dislike it, and can decide if it's a deal breaker for me or not.
Now you wouldn't fuck it up again.

 

[leviadragon99]

Oh hey, Yahtzee is hanging about my neck of the woods, nifty.

 

[baconmaster]

GTAV is easily my favorite entry of the series, but I agree with a lot of the points made here. Basically the same story as every other time he reviewed a game I liked (except for the Last of Us, but I think he reviewed that after reading a plot summary on wikipedia and watching a couple of gameplay videos.)

People will probably rage anyway. GTA is a series that gets stupidly high praise even when it's clunky and boring

I love how the people pre defending ZP are talking about "fanboy rage."

Yes, clunky and boring. Everyone buying and enjoying the game is wrong, your analysis of the game is quite original.

If you don't like the games, that's fine. This whole idea that you have to tear something down because you don't enjoy it is pathetic. If you want to rip on a game, at least use an original thought or provide some level of entertainment, otherwise you just seem like another kid latching onto a person like Yahtzee because they can't form their own opinion about anything.

I'm loving GTA5, actually. As I said, it's my favorite of the series. I'm even finding myself taking part in the silly minigames I used to hate in the series

I was referring to 4. It's the highest rated game of the generation, yet the vast majority of people I've spoken to about it have barely anything good to say about it. I'm inclined to agree with them. It had awful controls, an annoying social aspect, and was repetitive as hell.

Also, I'm not allowed to complain about bad controls if someone else already did it? Nice

 

[Evil Smurf]

All the characters are twats, I'll watch a lets play, but not buy it.

One of the GTAV missions has you mopping the floor. As I started down the third hallway, looking for smudges, I felt the sudden urge to go play SR4. At least SR4 had pancakes.

I've finished Saints Row 4 and could not find any pancakes!

 

[Madmanonfire]

No, you didn't read it, or you are purposefully lying to defend your precious escapist (see how easy that is?) and if they were complaining about the score, why? It wasn't a bad score.
If it was about the score, why were most of the "whiners" quoting the written review?

Bottom line, Tito spent the entire review complaining about the story and stating things that were demonstrably false (like the live invader section) and then ended it by giving it a good score, as if he's completely missing the point of doing the review.

It was unprofessional.

The Escapist staff and people like you rely on the "they just whining cus of score" strawman because you have nothing real to use to defend the review or address the actual complaints.

Umm... you're wrong.
The score was what brought all of the complainers to the thread because it was the lowest score on metacritic at the time, IIRC.
The parts of the review you're complaining about make up around half of the review, not the entire thing. You're exaggerating for the sake of trying to make your point seem correct.
The review was fair. Greg gave his opinion on what he liked and didn't like. He gave it a good score because it was a generally favorable review, with the only things he didn't actually like being the story and characters.
People are calling it fanboy rage here because there was some actual fanboy rage in the comments. If you looked at the thread, you would've seen multiple examples.

We have plenty of reasons to defend the review, while you have few to insult it.

 

[sageoftruth]

Finally. After hearing nothing but incessant glowing praise for a game no one had even tried yet at the time, I finally get to see Yahtzee tear it a new one. Thanks Yahtzee, you made my night. Really, I don't mind that it's popular. It's just that everyone's going "This'll be the best game ever made!!" and I'm thinking, "Why?" What makes this more promising than any other game that's coming out this month?

 

[BarrelsOfDouche]

Incoming vitriol in 3...

2...

1...

Oh, wait. It's already here.

 

[webby]

Finally. After hearing nothing but incessant glowing praise for a game no one had even tried yet at the time, I finally get to see Yahtzee tear it a new one. Thanks Yahtzee, you made my night. Really, I don't mind that it's popular. It's just that everyone's going "This'll be the best game ever made!!" and I'm thinking, "Why?" What makes this more promising than any other game that's coming out this month?

Because the game had a huge budget, talented people in charge, a solid track record, time to refine the game to their satisfaction etc. I'm not saying it IS the best game ever made but the reason it gets more hype and expectation than any games released around it is because it has all the components required to be a high water mark kinda game.

I could argue the point that it somewhat achieves setting a new benchmark because Los Santos in and of itself is a technical marvel that seem to have required a bit of a juggling act in order to cram it onto this console generation, but that's kind of subjective and I'm sure people will probably hate LS for the same reasons that I enjoy it.

Also, it never ceases to strike me as odd when people seem to hope that something they have yet to try (or have no intention of trying) is bad. It's an unusually obnoxious attitude to take when you think about it.

 

[RicoADF]

Hmm okay, he didn't like it that much I guess.

One thing I don't understand though, why is Saints Row considered 'fun' and the later GTA aren't? Because you can run around with a dildo and other wacky stuff? That's wacky. Not necessarily fun. I didn't play GTAV of course (having only a PC and stuff), but I definitely had tons more fun with GTA IV then SR2+3 combined and if GTA had the same stupid wacky humor everywhere, I'd like it less.

GTAV is best described as GTAIV engine with San Andreas gameplay. I love the game, just as I love Saints Row IV, I play the game I'm in the mood for at the time. But like every game it's not perfect, there are some things people don't like. I haven't had any issues so for me it's perfect, but I'm not going to claim that those that disagree are wrong, it's personal preference.

 

[civver]

Well that was disappointing. Plenty of significant problems with the game and he didn't even touch on them, like psychic cops and properties being worthless (in terms of money and constantly texting with annoying missions).

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

One of the GTAV missions has you mopping the floor.

At first I thought "Wow, the combat must be easy if you're mopping the floor with your opposition", but then I realized that you meant actually mopping a floor. And I thought "Wait, we already have a game for that [http://www.runestorm.com/viscera]."

 

[daxterx2005]

The reason its 5 is because its the fifth engine....right?

 

[C14N]

Also, it never ceases to strike me as odd when people seem to hope that something they have yet to try (or have no intention of trying) is bad. It's an unusually obnoxious attitude to take when you think about it.

I can see what you mean but at the same time, it's nice to hear at least one person who has some big problems with the game. Seems to me like no game should be averaging 98 on Metacritic (I actually just checked it and it's down to 97 but still) so it's nice to hear someone who isn't giving it an overwhelmingly positive review. I don't think I've ever heard of a movie or book getting the kind of near-unanimous praise that GTA 4 and 5 have gotten, video games seem to be the only medium where so much of the press can get sucked into the hype this much.

 

[bug_of_war]

Brace yourselves, all those whom believe themselves magical foresight tellers will warn of the coming rage comments from "fanboys". Oh wait, I'm waay too late into this thread...and it also seems that their powers of foresight are somewhat wrong...

 

[Branindain]

GTA is the perfect example of why this industry needs its Yahtzees desperately. GTA IV comes out and gets perfect scores and rampant acclaim across the board, and its Metacritic score is higher than should be possible when you consider the broad range of opinion it allegedly represents. Yet nowadays, with the hype long gone, most times I hear GTA IV mentioned, its flaws are being criticised. How is it no-one was professional enough to notice these flaws on a first playthrough? It's pathetic. And now, rather than learn anything, the cycle will begin again. Most frustrating of all, to my mind, are the reviewers who gave GTA IV a 10, and now, in giving GTA V another 10, will happily point out all the areas where it has improved weak points, or fixed problems that existed in the last version WHICH THEY GAVE A PERFECT SCORE.

 

[ServebotFrank]

It's interesting how when Yahtzee doesn't want to like a game, he brings up plot points that he doesn't particularly like and focuses on them. He did the same thing with the Last of Us.

Honestly, I miss the days when Zero Punctuation was about criticizing games due to actual issues with the gameplay and mechanics. There was hardly a word here about the gameplay itself. Yeah, the planes handle poorly but that's all that I got from this review. It really just seems lazy to me and an attempt to run against the mainstream. It's like he watched some character footage on YouTube and based the entire video on that.

I mean seriously, let's do a play-by-play. The first 45 seconds is complaining about the advertising. Then he complains about the fact that it's named GTA V even though there are more than 5 games, a joke he's made several times already about the same series. Then he complains about GTA IV. Next he describes the characters, saying they're all poorly written but gives no actual examples of them being poorly written other then that Franklin is whiny and misinterpreting Michael's overall character. After that he brings up the problem of linearity within the mission structure and the poor flight controls which I definitely agree with. The rest of the review he talks about not being able to play online yet and then saying it was ok but not great. That's just simply weak criticism and it's really disappointing.

I would have respected it a lot more if he brought up the fact that the traffic AI is pretty bad and the gunplay feels sticky and weird or maybe the brought up the texture popping and characters and cars randomly disappearing. But as far as I'm concerned there's no actual evidence that he even played the game.

I truly don't have a problem with people disliking what I don't like. Metal Gear Solid is a favorite of mine and I didn't have a problem with his MGS4 review. I also like Dead Space, Gears of War, and Borderlands. My problem is when the criticism isn't well thought out.

Yeah, I knew you were going to hate it. Further justification for me to not buy it! Plus I still need to get Saints Row 4.

I can tell you firsthand that Saints Row 4 is absolute garbage and not even accidentally good. It's not even a matter of opinion. It's glitchy, boring, has absolutely no sense of pacing, most of the content is literally copy-pasted from Saints Row 3, the missions are insultingly easy, and the superpowers simply break the game.

I agree with this 100% he completely misinterpreted Michael's Character. The point of his story was not that he thinks money doesn't bring more to life, it's him coming to terms that he's an asshole who does crime because he enjoys it and not do to any of the other excuses he keeps coming up with.

Seriously, compare this review with GTA IV where he made fun of the gameplay elements and it was funny because of how true it was. Here I honestly think Yahtzee just watched a couple of Let's plays and wants to stick it to the mainstream media and say it's not good.