GTA VI has so much to prove in the gameplay department
- Thread starter NomenNescio
- Start date
- Opinion
Shubh_C63
Member
Arcadey GTA were better 'Games'
Even though I did not love GTAV, the driving, the shooting, the exploration were meh. Yet I am in love with all of those characters and whenever they interact with anyone.
RDR2 (~6hrs) felt just right with amazing immersion with no negatives that GTAV had.
Realistic-GTA6 really might be GOAT that surpasses San Andreas or Vice City.
Even though I did not love GTAV, the driving, the shooting, the exploration were meh. Yet I am in love with all of those characters and whenever they interact with anyone.
RDR2 (~6hrs) felt just right with amazing immersion with no negatives that GTAV had.
Realistic-GTA6 really might be GOAT that surpasses San Andreas or Vice City.
MMaRsu
Member
Theres no input lag in first person, set deadzone to 0, aim accel up,.FPS STANDARD control scheme.
MMaRsu
Member
The driving meh
Bro has never played a Ubisoft game with cars in it I assume.
Absolutely ridiculous notions itt
Thabass
Member
This is actually what's more important to me than the mission structure. It needs to feel like a world that I can feel myself being in and being able to explore that world and feel lost it in it. When I go to a random store to rob it, there should be some events that happen based on what I'm doing or the given situation. That is what an open world should do. It should surprise me and give me some scripted, random events that allow me to feel like the world is ever changing. That is something that RDR2 kind of did and it made the experience all the better for it.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
And yet the last game in the series is the bestselling game of all time.
You guys love to throw shit at this series and overstate its flaws.
Bungie
Member
Can't tell you how shitty it feels to shoot stuff on most games/engines, especially unreal 5, you get zero feedback, enemies dont even react to your shots or they have a scripted death etc. R* games actually feels good to sink bullets into the enemies, The world reacts back to me through my gameplay perfectly, which brings a level of immersion very few studios can pull off.
Also imo each game is a improvement over the last. RDR 2 feels alot better than GTA V. So exact the same level of improvement with VI.
Also imo each game is a improvement over the last. RDR 2 feels alot better than GTA V. So exact the same level of improvement with VI.
Last edited:
March Climber
Member
The free aim still has bad input lag/acceleration issues too.
Listen guys, the people here bringing up these issues aren't bringing them up to hate Rockstar, we just want better things for their games. I have played open city game after open city game after GTA V and saw other devs mostly leave rockstar behind, one by one, in the controls and even the mission design aspect.
And before you say it, yes those games did sell less, but that's because they weren't gifted with the grandfathered I.P. name of "Grand Theft Auto". I would bet a ton of money that if Sleeping Dogs were named "Grand Theft Auto (insert spinoff title here) it would have sold so much that the studio would have been alive today.
I just want them to put as much love and care into the gameplay as they do with their attention to detail, both graphically and with NPC-behavior.
Shubh_C63
Member
I actually haven't, except Wildlands. Does the competition doing awful makes the remaining automatically better ?The driving meh
Bro has never played a Ubisoft game with cars in it I assume.
Absolutely ridiculous notions itt
GTA Liberty, Vice City, San Andreas, most of the game was just driving to places, and back in the day it was really fun.
In 2015, it wasn't good enough. Not discussing handling and friction and lol-whatnot, Just saying driving was a HUGE part of previous GTAs which didn't felt that impactful in GTA5.
The only drive mission I enjoyed were the looong road, the highway chase and one plane mission where I actually had to learn a bit.
kevboard
Member
So every Halo and Destiny player is casual player as we can't disable every assist?
If mouse has a "small" advantage means controllers sucks compared to mouse.
Halo and Destiny have shitty controls and need excessive aim assist due to that.
if they fixed their shitty controls they could allow it to be turned off, and the games would be better off.
Apex Legends has near perfect (only near due to a max sensitivity that's too slow) aiming on controller and doesn't need it.
PUBG also has decent aiming on controller and doesn't need it... and doesn't have it for that matter.
having a small disadvantage doesn't mean it sucks.
if you play a PC shooter on the wrong mouse you'll also have a small disadvantage over someone with the best gaming mouse on the market.
so by that logic shooters suck to play on any mouse other than the best ones.
So the need of weapon wheels and claw grip to have access to every button all the time is a matter only of being hardcore gamer with devs just letting you rebind keys??
That with the keyboard it has more than enough buttons.
most shooters don't need such a huge amount of buttons.
but this is indeed mostly a binding issue on controller.
jump on L1 and crouch on R3 already solves the biggest issue (that being having to leg go of the right stick for movement abilities)
you don't need to have access to all buttons at once, you also don't have that on a keyboard, or do you have 20 fingers per hand or something?
try pressing 0 on your keyboard while moving normally with WASD. if you have massive hands you can do it maybe, most people can't.
you only have the buttons in the immediate vicinity of WASD to realistically work with.
using the ones further away is often more cumbersome than an inventory wheel
it's easier to do a quick claw grip to reach the D-Pad on a dualsense than using the number keys beyond maybe the first 6 on a keyboard.
but I could do with controllers having more buttons ngl.
Nintendo only using their new grip buttons for rebinds is disappointing.
controllers should adapt having an additional set of bumpers and at least 1 grip button per side as the new default.
even as is tho, you have a lot of buttons on a controller, more than enough for most games.
you have 4 dpad buttons, 4 face buttons, 2 bumpers, stick buttons, 2 interface buttons.
games only run out of buttons in extreme cases, or if they have a lot of unnecessary stuff bound to them (emote wheels being something that comes to mind in modern GaaS games, total waste of a button)
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
RDR2 on console has input lag, doesn't matter which perspective.
GTA5 at 60fps is ok, but the aiming still feels absolutely awful and makes gunfights feel like ass.
GudOlRub
Member
Let's agree to disagree, to this day RDR2 is still the most detailed, immersive and amazing game I've ever played, everytime I play it I find new stuff and if GTA VI doubles down on that kind of immersive gameplay mechanics I'd be eccstatic. But I do recognize that these games have different audiences so I do expect GTA VI to be a bit more casualised for the masses.
I am hoping immersive mechanics like concealed carry, only being able to carry 1 or 2 big weapons phyically on your back and stashing weapons on car trunks instead of infinite gun wheels that we saw on the leaks make it to the final release of the game. On the singleplayer mode at least, I'd be fine with the the old infinite weapon wheel in GTA Online.
I'll go even further, to this day I still suspect that everyone who at the time said GOW 2018 is a better game than RDR2, is either blind or a closeted crackhead.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Could not agree more. I always felt "lost in the world" with RDR2, which made it so endearing.
DirtInUrEye
Member
Really? MP3 stuffers from the exact same issues. It just looks better when doing the movement, but the aiming in particular was absolutely subpar.
viveks86
Member
Fair point. People are gonna drink it even if it is Pißwasser.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
The difference between mouse vs analog sticks is not small, it's very significant, especially turning speeds maintaining accuracy. One mouse vs another can be what you call small.
most shooters don't need such a huge amount of buttons.
but this is indeed mostly a binding issue on controller.
jump on L1 and crouch on R3 already solves the biggest issue (that being having to leg go of the right stick for movement abilities)
you don't need to have access to all buttons at once, you also don't have that on a keyboard, or do you have 20 fingers per hand or something?
try pressing 0 on your keyboard while moving normally with WASD. if you have massive hands you can do it maybe, most people can't.
you only have the buttons in the immediate vicinity of WASD to realistically work with.
using the ones further away is often more cumbersome than an inventory wheel
it's easier to do a quick claw grip to reach the D-Pad on a dualsense than using the number keys beyond maybe the first 6 on a keyboard.
but I could do with controllers having more buttons ngl.
Nintendo only using their nee grip buttons for rebinds is disappointing.
controllers should adapt having an additional set of bumpers and at least 1 grip button per side as the new default.
even as is tho, you have a lot of buttons on a controller, more than enough for most games.
you have 4 dpad buttons, 4 face buttons, 2 bumpers, stick buttons, 2 interface buttons.
games only run out of buttons in extreme cases, of if they have a lot of unnecessary stuff bound to them (emote wheels being something that comes to mind in modern GaaS games, total waste of a button)
Most don't need because they can't on controllers. On Arma you can't access all commands all the time but all movement commands you can. That is why claw grip will always be required on controllers for something like reloading and/or changing guns, because of the lack of enough buttons and buttons layout.
Last edited:
HRK69
Member
I've said this before but I don't get this complaint
Sure, some boundaries could definitely be loosened. What do you think missions are for? That's when Rockstar locks you in and tells the story they've spent years building. You want to just stop halfway through a high stakes heist or shootout and go play golf instead?
What's next? pausing a bank robbery so Trevor can do yoga?
Missions is when Rockstar pulls you into the world for real, when the story takes the wheel and you're along for the ride
The controls? That's a separate conversation. Half the people whining about them are just bad at games
kevboard
Member
the aiming wasn't perfect, but compared to GTA and RDR it was a huge improvement.
also character movement reacts very quickly as well.
the biggest issue I think on controller was that the game was 30fps.
if they added proper deadzone settings, a reaction curve selection and run it at 60+fps it would feel absolutely fine...
I know this because I did this on PC by using Steam's controller settings lol
kevboard
Member
you get the mission to look for someone who bystanders say went into a certain building, and you walk over an invisible barrier into an INSTANT game over...
THAT is what we're talking about here.
no time limit, no urgency... instant game over if you cross invisible limits.
or bad guys hide in a building, you try to climb up the side to look through windows... instant game over, because you were supposed to go through the door.
that is a real thing that can happen in RDR2.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
There are no open world games that do driving better so just because you didnt think it was fun millions do.
MMaRsu
Member
I understand but maybe its time to come to terms with this. Gta iV, RDR1, GTA V, RDR2 all do this.
The open world is a sandbox but the missions are super structured and lineair
To expect otherwise after four/five major releases is crazy
Puscifer
Member
That's just silly. Speed runners show there's been plenty ways to finish the PS2 Trilogy and be creative in how you accomplish many missions since their sandboxes. But since San Andreas the structure has continuously gotten more and more linear which makes zero sense considering it's taking place in a living world. They might as well make a Mafia-esque game with a dead open world.
lughnasadh123
Member
RDR2 was a brilliant immersive cowboy RPG lite that controlled great for what it set out to do.
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
I agree. However, its still by far the best Open World game ever
GTA V is the final boss of counterarguments to "Gameplay is King"
GTA V is the final boss of counterarguments to "Gameplay is King"
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
to expect well a designed game is crazy?
I mean, I agree, most AAA games are terribly designed... but I haven't given up hope yet, and hope Rockstar finally fixes their bad game design.
also GTA4 wasn't this exteme in terms of limiting creative solutions. it wasn't untill GTA5 and RDR2 when it became so extreme that literal Call of Duty missions gave players more agency.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
You're asking them to develop a game that keeps account of any contingency and let a mission go however a player wants?
Yeah I dont think you understand what kind of undertaking that would be.
Just because its not what you want out of a game, doesnt mean its not well designed lmao.
If you play chess and want to do moves that arent permitted in the game do you say its badly designed as well? Because you cant do whatever you want?
Bad game design.. lol give me a fucking break. Just because the game doesnt let you solve the missions however you want, insanity.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
Yes, the ps2 trilogy. Games that were developed in a year. And with much less going on than the newer games.
I already stated that from GTAIV onwards they totally dropped that.
And its not silly, its exactly what theyve done.
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
"hey I don't want my coffee to taste like coke"
"WHAT? SO YOU WANT IT TO TASTE LIKE PIZZA! DO YOU KNOW HOW HARD THIS IS TO DO!?"
that's literally you right now.
have you ever played Watch Dogs 2? how is it that Watch Dogs 2 can give me a mission to fulfill a specific goal, and I can fulfill that goal in 3, 4 or 5 different ways?
in Watch Dogs 2, there was a mission where you have to hack the central computer hidden inside (I think it was) a church that's at the outskirts of the city. after stealthily reaching it and getting the info I needed, I would have, in theory, needed to go all the way back through the well guarded property of that church... that was the obvious way to do it. the whole property was surrounded by a strong fence that I can't get through.
but I saw a highway in the distance, and I already unlocked the ability to remote control cars (as in being able to make them turn left/right a bit and make them accelerate).
so what I did was, I waited for a car to come by, it was just close enough to be hacked, made it steer right, made it accelerate, and break the fence.
then I hoped in and drove off.
this is is a simple example from a direct competitor of GTA. and something that gave the player more agency than any missions in any of Rockstar's last 2 open world games.
having invisible death barriers with instant game overs, in a mission with no urgency, is bad game design. plain and simple.
giving an instant game over to a player that wants to fulfill the given goal of the mission in a creative way that makes intuitive sense is bad game design.
the game has mechanics that let you climb, let you shoot through windows, hop into windows.
yet you get a game over if you dare to use these mechanics if the game puts invisible death barriers there for no reason other than limiting player agency.
this is more comparable to you using your queen to move all the way across the chess board, and the other player taking your queen away for no reason other than "that wasn't supposed to happen".
using established game mechanics and getting a game over for no intuitive or logical reason is insane.
Last edited:
KloetenQuetsche
Member
Were these gameplay leak vids real on YouTube?
PeteBull
Member
Yup, u can still see them actually, ofc they are old by now and will be even older by 2026(be it may or more likely sept-dec 2026).
Shubh_C63
Member
Definitely I was not speaking for millions, only me.
For gunplay though I feel general consensus holds that it was lacking.
edit - Driving in itself might be ok but wasn't as good and enjoyable part of GTAV as was in older Arcadey GTA games.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
Because the game is designed around it? In complete contrast to GTA, which goes for super directed missions, for I dunno, the past five games?
Like I said, take it or leave it.
They arent designing missions around every contingency and let the player decide how to tackle things, because it interferes with their way of telling a structured story with characters that respond to your actions, mission triggers etc.
They don't WANT you to fuck around.
And that is why they arent designing the game around it.
Also Watch Dogs 2 is a turd compared to GTA V in more ways than I can count.
Driving physics? Complete shit
NPC's? Boring and lame
Missions? see above, oh wow I gotta fly my drone in here and then turn 20 switches so the power aligns!! BRILLIANT GAME DESIGN
Shooting? What shooting, you barely shoot shit and when you do its terrible.
The only cool thing about WD2 is the ability to drive those little cranes around, and doing a backflip off some higher slopes.
And the MC was pretty cool, the rest of his "gang" is fucking annoying and cringeworthy.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
Not really. That stuff is there for the open world, not for you to fuck around with in missions.
And they make that pretty clear ingame.
And like I said, they've been designing their missions this way since GTA IV. To expect any different by now is literally insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting things to change.
R* aint gonna change it. They will have very structured missions in GTA 6, maybe a few where more player agency is allowed, and hey I applaud it! I'm not saying I wouldnt want to fuck around a bit on missions. Its just not going to happen.
HJuggernaut
Member
To us "gamers" yes, but to the general population no. All they want is a shinier prettier GTA and that is exactly what they are going to get.
Aenima
Member
One of the best mission in GTAV was actually an Heist mission from GTA Online. (Caio Perico) What made this great to me was that you had to travel to an island and steal as much shit (drugs, jewelry, etc) and escape the island. You had a certain time to do this but the game gave you alot of freedom to choose how to complete this mission. You had various ways to enter the island, by air, by sea, undercover, in stealth, etc, and same for ways to escape the island. There was also prep missions before the heist that would allow you to increase your options. Example: during the prep missions you could steal a submarine, now you could enter the island and escape completly undectected. This was the way i did this mission most of the times as this mission was the biggest money maker for the online mode and could be done soloSo i did this heist everytime i needed big money.
I hope we see more missions like this in GTA6 main story where the missions are designed in ways that can be completed in several ways, and not in a 1 way scipted or mission failed way like recent Rockstar games.
I hope we see more missions like this in GTA6 main story where the missions are designed in ways that can be completed in several ways, and not in a 1 way scipted or mission failed way like recent Rockstar games.
![L*][*N*K](/data/avatars/m/842/842515.jpg?1750247637){kind=avatar}
kevboard
Member
I am not even talking about super extremely open ended missions.
what Rockstar is doing is so limiting that it truly just bad game design. it's not just linear, but also just awful.
if a simple goal like "go into house and kill" doesn't allow you to use the game's inherent mechanics to fulfill that goal without you getting a game over without warning, then that's just bad design.
so I don't think it's unreasonable to expect good game design, even if it wasn't present in the past.
the dev team behind GTA6 is not the exact same as that behind RDR2, or GTA5, let alone GTA4 (and again, GTA4 was'n this extrme in terms of limiting creative solutions)
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Member
Well I disagree it's not 'bad game design'.
But its also not intuitive, I will agree.
Again I would like them to give some more freedom I just dont see it happening really
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
aka bad game design.
if the game gives you the objective to go into a house and kill people, and you try to do that using basic game mechanics, but this results in a game over.
HOW IS THIS NOT BAD GAME DESIGN? that is insanity right there
we'll see
GudOlRub
Member
I don't have a horse in the mission design race, I play through Vice City every year, also play IV, V and RDR2 every now and then and I enjoy both types of mission design.
Whatever R* does for this one I'm game and I'm sure I'll love it.
In terms of freedom and gameplay variety the open world more than makes up for the close-ended mission design for me.
With this said, I do think VI desperately needs a complete law system overhaul, V's was quite terrible and such a gigantic downgrade from IV it's not even funny.
It's the one aspect about the game I'm afraid it might disappoint me since the law system in RDR2 wasn't exactly stellar either but I'm hopeful.
Whatever R* does for this one I'm game and I'm sure I'll love it.
In terms of freedom and gameplay variety the open world more than makes up for the close-ended mission design for me.
With this said, I do think VI desperately needs a complete law system overhaul, V's was quite terrible and such a gigantic downgrade from IV it's not even funny.
It's the one aspect about the game I'm afraid it might disappoint me since the law system in RDR2 wasn't exactly stellar either but I'm hopeful.