I don't see how I didn't see this thread earlier, since I was just thinking of creating a similar thread. First of all let me say that I'm a big GTA4 fan and I agree with everything the OP said. I think that GTA4's biggest achievement is the city; how detailed and realistic it is, how alive it feels, how beautiful it is. Just driving or flying around Liberty City is as fun as any of Saints Row 2's missions. I also love the realism in the game's physics and vehicle handling. I happen to be someone who loves realism in games, but you don't need to be a realism fanatic to appreciate the individual and realistic feelings and behaviors of the various vehicles in the game.
The story is GTA4's second biggest accomplishment. It's extremely compelling, interesting, and well-written and represented, up there with the best movies or books. I think they could have made Niko a bit more interesting, but he's still a great character along with the rest of the characters, and I found myself thinking deeply about and caring for all of them.
But if this is true, then are so many people dissapointed in it, and prefer Saints Row 2? Because of GTA4's one fault as a videogame: it isn't particularly fun on its own. Sure, gamers like me who can spend hours exploring the world and admiring its beauty will find it one of the funnest games around. But probably more people are just in it for the fun; they want to get into crazy, exciting missions and kill tons of enemies. But GTA4 does not provide this.
For an explanation, I would like to paraphrase one of the Housers (makers of GTA, I forget which one though) when he said that he was making the game that he wanted to make, not the game the gamers want to play. Rockstar could have thrown in missions that have massive exciting gun fights and chases, but they didn't want that. They wanted a beautiful, realistic, detailed world with an inspiring, interesting, well-made story. And this is exactly where they succeeded. It's simply not realistic for a gangster to find himself mowing down hundreds of random henchmen, like most of SR2's missions. Some people don't appreciate this, but I do.
Conclusion: Many people don't like GTA4 not because it's a bad game, but because of what it is. They don't find it particularly fun because Rockstar didn't try to make it particularly fun. They focused on making a great game world with a great story to play through, and the fun would come from that for those who could find it.
So maybe you can blame Rockstar for not making a game for everyone, but I'm not. Rockstar completely succeeded in everything they tried to do, and GTA4 deserves to be remembered as a great game. But if some people would rather the crazy, wild, exciting experience of Saints Row 2, then so be it. I don't prefer that, but you don't see me calling SR2 bad.
Thanks for making this thread for me to post that in, so I don't have to make my own thread for it.
The story is GTA4's second biggest accomplishment. It's extremely compelling, interesting, and well-written and represented, up there with the best movies or books. I think they could have made Niko a bit more interesting, but he's still a great character along with the rest of the characters, and I found myself thinking deeply about and caring for all of them.
But if this is true, then are so many people dissapointed in it, and prefer Saints Row 2? Because of GTA4's one fault as a videogame: it isn't particularly fun on its own. Sure, gamers like me who can spend hours exploring the world and admiring its beauty will find it one of the funnest games around. But probably more people are just in it for the fun; they want to get into crazy, exciting missions and kill tons of enemies. But GTA4 does not provide this.
For an explanation, I would like to paraphrase one of the Housers (makers of GTA, I forget which one though) when he said that he was making the game that he wanted to make, not the game the gamers want to play. Rockstar could have thrown in missions that have massive exciting gun fights and chases, but they didn't want that. They wanted a beautiful, realistic, detailed world with an inspiring, interesting, well-made story. And this is exactly where they succeeded. It's simply not realistic for a gangster to find himself mowing down hundreds of random henchmen, like most of SR2's missions. Some people don't appreciate this, but I do.
Conclusion: Many people don't like GTA4 not because it's a bad game, but because of what it is. They don't find it particularly fun because Rockstar didn't try to make it particularly fun. They focused on making a great game world with a great story to play through, and the fun would come from that for those who could find it.
So maybe you can blame Rockstar for not making a game for everyone, but I'm not. Rockstar completely succeeded in everything they tried to do, and GTA4 deserves to be remembered as a great game. But if some people would rather the crazy, wild, exciting experience of Saints Row 2, then so be it. I don't prefer that, but you don't see me calling SR2 bad.
Thanks for making this thread for me to post that in, so I don't have to make my own thread for it.
