Did you play Grand Theft Auto: Vice City? If "yes", then you've played this game.
Its the same graphics engine, same vehicles, same weapons, same playstyle, etc.
The differences are the setting, storyline, and the skin color of the main character. That's about it.
More later when I feel like it.
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
I'm pondering writing a full review on this, but I'm not sure if its worth it. Who'd read it? Everyone's heard of the GTA series and they know what to expect. Stil, I'll go over some details.
This was NOT the GTA team's best effort.
The lead character is black, the music is different, and the city is different. Other than that, its pretty much the same game as Vice City. Except, not as much fun.
The problem here is that the developers did a piss poor job of drawing the player into the story.
In Vice City, I felt like I knew the characters and I was into the story. This time, things feel rushed, and the characters' actions don't make a lot of sense. It just wasn't well made.
On top of this is the layout of the game world. It is composed of three seperate cities and a few "towns". The game world is pretty big, although not as big as you would think. Still, this increased land area points out a glaring flaw in the game design: most areas of the game are pointless. If there are no missions there, then why do they exist?
This game could have easily been so much more. Unfortunately, its very obvious that this game simply represents a stopgap until the next Playstation is released and a new GTA game is released with it.
Hell, even the talk radio station is boring this time around. The developers also got rid of rampages for some reason!?
Like I said, this may be a "newer" game than Vice City, but it pales in comparison. Vice City had more charm, character, and most importantly, was more fun.
GTA: San Andreas should have come out before Vice City. It would have gotten more from me than:
6 out of 10 stars.
Don't get me wrong, the game is still fun to play and you'll still find lots to do. Its just that this game isn't up to the standards set by Vice City and does more to showcase its flaws rather than its strengths.
This was NOT the GTA team's best effort.
The lead character is black, the music is different, and the city is different. Other than that, its pretty much the same game as Vice City. Except, not as much fun.
The problem here is that the developers did a piss poor job of drawing the player into the story.
In Vice City, I felt like I knew the characters and I was into the story. This time, things feel rushed, and the characters' actions don't make a lot of sense. It just wasn't well made.
On top of this is the layout of the game world. It is composed of three seperate cities and a few "towns". The game world is pretty big, although not as big as you would think. Still, this increased land area points out a glaring flaw in the game design: most areas of the game are pointless. If there are no missions there, then why do they exist?
This game could have easily been so much more. Unfortunately, its very obvious that this game simply represents a stopgap until the next Playstation is released and a new GTA game is released with it.
Hell, even the talk radio station is boring this time around. The developers also got rid of rampages for some reason!?
Like I said, this may be a "newer" game than Vice City, but it pales in comparison. Vice City had more charm, character, and most importantly, was more fun.
GTA: San Andreas should have come out before Vice City. It would have gotten more from me than:
6 out of 10 stars.
Don't get me wrong, the game is still fun to play and you'll still find lots to do. Its just that this game isn't up to the standards set by Vice City and does more to showcase its flaws rather than its strengths.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”