Page 5 of 12
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:16 pm
by KK
more heat than light wrote:For all we know, this guy might have got bad beef with Future (and Rockstar by the sounds of it)
They'd still be selling meat out the back of a truck.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:16 pm
by TheTurnipKing
Fade wrote:Pedz wrote:If GTAIV was a 10, Saints Row 2 was an 11.
I adore Saints Row the Third, but it really shows just how advanced GTA IV is. Technically SRIII isn't a patch on GTA IV. It's also not as good a sandbox.
But it
is raucous good fun, though.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:17 pm
by Knoyleo
I'm now convinced tha $ilva is one of those people on /v/ who just posts VIRAL VIRAL VIRAL SAGE FOR VIRAL any time someone posts anything remotely positive.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:17 pm
by False
Knoyleo wrote:I'm now convinced tha $ilva is one of those people on /v/ who just posts VIRAL VIRAL VIRAL SAGE FOR VIRAL any time someone posts anything remotely positive.
sage goes in every field
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:19 pm
by KK
Nobody lose sight of the fact GTA IV was a fantastic game. I say was, as played now it's remarkably clunky next to a lot of other third person action games. Same reason I wouldn't want to play Vice City again as it'd probably ruin great memories.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:19 pm
by $ilva $hadow
Falsey wrote:Silva, /v/ isnt nearly as deep as you think it is. Its autistic sperging neckbeards arguing with autistic sperging neckbeards. Great as a spectator sport and funny as strawberry float sometimes, but most certainly not gospel.
I'm having trouble finding where I said I treat it as gospel. I use it along with RPS and numerous other game players to gauge against the reviews and come to a conclusion.
I already know that on /v/ people will say it's really good, or really bad, that fills in the top and bottom end of the review spectrum, and I use RPS and people like winkle (system shock, bioshock, deus ex fan) flossy (autistic neckbeard for racing sims) and others depending on what game I'm looking at to flesh out the views on that game.
I do read /v/ as a spectator sport as the hilarity is just too much.
O look, no surprise at marfo jumping in about /v/
Useless opinion 101 from marf.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:19 pm
by False
I play GTA 4 all the time. Still.
Its great. strawberry float the haters.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:20 pm
by Mafro
TheTurnipKing wrote:Fade wrote:Pedz wrote:If GTAIV was a 10, Saints Row 2 was an 11.
I adore Saints Row the Third, but it really shows just how advanced GTA IV is. Technically SRIII isn't a patch on GTA IV.
True, but in terms of enjoyment GTA IV wasn't a patch on SR3 for me. God knows why Rockstar decided to make 4 so dull.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:22 pm
by Mafro
$ilva $hadow wrote:O look, no surprise at marfo jumping in about /v/
Useless opinion 101 from marf.
Serious question, why do you act like such a banana split on the forum to everyone and insist on playing up to this silly forum character when most of the time you're absolutely fine in Mumble?
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:22 pm
by Qikz
Mafro wrote:TheTurnipKing wrote:Fade wrote:Pedz wrote:If GTAIV was a 10, Saints Row 2 was an 11.
I adore Saints Row the Third, but it really shows just how advanced GTA IV is. Technically SRIII isn't a patch on GTA IV.
True, but in terms of enjoyment GTA IV wasn't a patch on SR3 for me. God knows why Rockstar decided to make 4 so dull.
GTAIV had the issue of the story being dull as strawberry float. GTA3 and Vice City had great stories that were so unbelievable it made them interesting, much like Saints Row does. With GTAIV Rockstar seemed to want to make GTA more serious and it didn't work.
It's why BOGT was so much better, it was back to having crazy characters in a crazy setting with fun missions to do.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:23 pm
by False
SR3 was stupid and removed a load of the little options for no reason. The physics are shite and it looks like dick half the time. If not dull means retarded childish barely done minigames then sign me up for dull every time.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:26 pm
by Qikz
The only actual good thing about vanilla GTAIV was the city.
The only reason I even bothered with the missions was because the game strawberry floating locked me out of everywhere I wanted to go. They should bring back the money unlocking islands/maps system from GTA1 and 2.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:27 pm
by Mafro
StayDead wrote:Mafro wrote:TheTurnipKing wrote:Fade wrote:Pedz wrote:If GTAIV was a 10, Saints Row 2 was an 11.
I adore Saints Row the Third, but it really shows just how advanced GTA IV is. Technically SRIII isn't a patch on GTA IV.
True, but in terms of enjoyment GTA IV wasn't a patch on SR3 for me. God knows why Rockstar decided to make 4 so dull.
GTAIV had the issue of the story being dull as strawberry float. GTA3 and Vice City had great stories that were so unbelievable it made them interesting, much like Saints Row does. With GTAIV Rockstar seemed to want to make GTA more serious and it didn't work.
It's why BOGT was so much better, it was back to having crazy characters in a crazy setting with fun missions to do.
I just hope they don't make the same mistakes again with V.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:28 pm
by $ilva $hadow
Mafro wrote:$ilva $hadow wrote:O look, no surprise at marfo jumping in about /v/
Useless opinion 101 from marf.
Serious question, why do you act like such a banana split on the forum to everyone and insist on playing up to this silly forum character when most of the time you're absolutely fine in Mumble?
Are you serious? Mr "O look silvas on drugs again", the most condescending act comes from you. "O look its silva again". Just parroting Falseys post when I've clarified numerous times on how I use the sources to come to conclusions.
I say this kind of stuff on mumble all the time, it just doesn't come off as harsh because you can't change the tone of voice. If anything it's you who doesn't say this kind of stuff on mumble and keep it on grcade. It's really annoying when you decide to pick on things completely unrelated to what we're discussing in order to undermine whatever opinion I have.
Silva "Deus Ex Human rev is garbage and didn't deserve the reviews it did, it completely takes me for a fool"
Marfo "lol at you reading 4ch*n so much".
You know how hypocritical that gooseberry fool is? And for you to have the nerve to assume that I'm the one being spiteful or out of order, and wondering why I'm replying to you in the way that I do, it's insulting, you act like an undercover banana split with the snide one line posts and parroting of bullshit you know not to be true and then cry when I'm going to be a banana split back?
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:29 pm
by Knoyleo
I want the drug running from Chinatown wars in the next one. I was strawberry floating minted, and didn't even bother with the story missions for ages.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:31 pm
by Mafro
$ilva $hadow wrote:Mafro wrote:$ilva $hadow wrote:O look, no surprise at marfo jumping in about /v/
Useless opinion 101 from marf.
Serious question, why do you act like such a banana split on the forum to everyone and insist on playing up to this silly forum character when most of the time you're absolutely fine in Mumble?
Are you serious?
Yes.
Knoyleo wrote:I want the drug running from Chinatown wars in the next one. I was strawberry floating minted, and didn't even bother with the story missions for ages.
I'd love to see another Chinatown Wars-style old school GTA game, but I don't think that'll ever happen after the sales of that game. I'm surprised they haven't ported the original games to iOS or something by now.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:32 pm
by False
$ilva $hadow wrote:Just parroting Falseys post
que? I didnae say squit
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:32 pm
by Mafro
Squawk!
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:32 pm
by KK
Wasn't there a columnist in EDGE who claimed Rockstar advertised their 18 rated games to kids? This resulted in a massive blow-up with Rockstar & Future? Can't remember what year this was. 2002/3, possibly.
GamesMaster was given the exclusive review of GTA: SA, which resulted in a few articles online (I remember Spong being one) claiming it was lamentable how a magazine mostly read by a younger demographic had the first & such in-depth coverage of a violent game that the majority of their readers could supposedly never play anyway. Future issued some sort of press release or comment in response.
Re: Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bo
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:39 pm
by Pedz
$ilva $hadow wrote:Dude I don't know what score the game is worth, except that it's not worth a 10/10 based on all the other games that get awarded high scores for being a game from a big publisher.
Are you saying that big games published by big publishers aren't allowed to get 10's, as no big game published by a big publisher is ever worthy of it? Or have I read that wrong?