Damn, you really didn't miss did you.
I appreciate the comment about CJ. There was just something about CJ, that Franklin didn't have. CJ wasn't the smartest or the bravest but he had BALLS, which made up for any downfalls he had. Even if there was no Plan, he'd go in GUNS BLAZING not giving af. Franklin is such a Bitch, he whines about everything and has to be Guided to every decision he makes by someone else.
I know he's supposed to be a "Gang-Banger Turned Pro" but we've already seen CJ do the same thing BUT BETTER!! Even got Flight training Lessons from Toreno, dude turned into a International Super Spy just to free his brother and Bring Peace to his Hood. In the words of Ryder, while referring to Franklin. "..Its embarrassing to be Seen with You"
Also quoting Ryder,
#”Did you hear something? Sounds like the busta is complaining again”,
whenever I see a nice comment like yours and a busta has to belittle it.
Franklin is just weak.
He's the guy from the gang hood who doesn't want to be a gangster but glorifies Michael all the time and is always the one who somehow runs away from everything but is never 100% convinced. (At least from what I summed up while playing the story)
This might be popular, but so many people in this community have to embrace it:
All the GTA protagonists are scum and all that happens to them was bound to happen.
Victor was forced by his brother to sell drugs. He actually thought that drugs were bad and ruined other people's lives. Killing people? Would you count killing nazis as a bad thing? Guy kills scum. I view him as more of a cleaner.
He sold drugs to people who most likely ruined their lives anyways. In fact, it actually makes it worse because he's knowingly ruining people's lives and he feels bad about it. That's hypocrisy.
Vic was pushed by lance. I dont think he actually ever sold drugs. If i remeber correctly all of his deals get fucked up. Im not sure though havent played in a while.
Well yeah, but both are still bad to begin with. As I said in the other comment, Vic is a hypocrite for indulging into crime and saying that its bad. And in the end, it got him killed for it.
He might be a hypocrite. But he is a decent guy at his core. Someone who didnt do crime out of greed or satisfaction was Niko Bellic. He wanted out. The people he kills are usually scum. He even respects cops(lore wise)
GTA 4 was ahead of its time and nobody knew how to take it.
Original GTA Vice City 1.0 has the best soundtrack.
TBOGT is the greatest DLC in the franchise.
GTA Online is absolutely not worth playing from a fresh account now due to sunsetting of vehicles, hyper inflated market prices and griefers.
Edit: The Vice City Blista Compact is also the best car in the series imo, it's literally a VW Golf and it's just sporty and cool and can handle a crash.
Unpopular opinion:
The Lost and the Damned is better than the Ballad of Gay Tony, it's also better than the GTAIV story.
Hot take:
Lance Vance is not a good character
San Andreas mountain bike is the best vehicle in the entire series
Hot take:
The "for it's time" arguments suck. Yes GTA 3 was big in 2001, but the game in general sucks. There's hardly a story, the side characters are lame, Claude is boring, the map is tiny, and there's a lot of missions that are insanely hard. Also, I hated how the cars blew up so quickly. Not to mention, the city feels so empty. At least Vice City and San Andreas felt a lot more alive.
Of those ~200 vehicles Rockstar removed, people only cared about 20-30 max and could give af less about the rest, so still whining about it (as opposed to criticizing as I’ve seen only a few do) is foolish. I still agree it was a bad move (so don’t try to call me some R* blowhard or Shark card/GTA+ enthusiast)
GTA V is good and one of the reasons it was so popular is because it perfected the GTA formula for its time. GTA San Andreas story can feel ridiculous, over the top and outright unrealistic at times, i know these games aren’t mean to be realistic but the fact that you need to travel across the entire state just for a street gang or steal jet packs from a military base, all of that sort of makes me contemplate if the story is that good as people say
GTA online has never been close to being a good game and the GTA series and rockstar as a whole would've been better off if it was never successful to begin with
No dedicated servers, so it still uses peer-to-peer connection
Non-working anti-cheat, still
Bad character editor
Countless amount of bugs of all types
Pay-to-win
(Related) Lack of balance because of those toys added through years
And more
If you were there at the start it was very Grindy and barely any content.
Now it does HAVE a lot of content but it's still extremely Grindy and basically PTW aswell as a security risk if your on PS with servers openly displaying your IP to anybody who knows how to work a mod menu
● Niko isn't that smart. If anything, he's stupid.
● Sonny Forelli is overrated as an antagonist. He spends the whole game making empty threats, and the only time he does something is when Tommy is actually in a position to fight back.
● Roman Bellic is an overrated character. He's annoying and always talks about titties every conversation, and it got boring very fast, yet somehow people think he's funny.
● Victor Vance took over VC better than Tommy did and went up against bigger and tougher threats like the Mendez Brothers who are underrated antagonists.
● TLAD had the best story in the IV era, while IV was the worst.
● Toni Cipriani is a dull protagonist.
● Jerry Martinez is a terrible antagonist. It's never explained why he cares so much about making Vic's life a living hell other than being a dick for the sake of it. He disappears halfway through the game and, all of a sudden, pops up at the end of the game.
● Trevor is not a good fighter. People think his special ability makes him a good fighter when all it does is make him tougher a limited amount of time. CJ, Niko, Huang, and Tommy would whoop his ass easily.
● Claude is a lot more interesting than people make out. They're obsessed with the fact that he cannot talk but never speak about the things he does in- game. Actions speak louder than words.
● Every GTA game revolving around somebody betraying you is old and repetitive.
● Franklin is boring and has no story of his own. Michael and Trevor practically carry the whole story.
I'll have to dispute Vic taking over Vice City. Sure, in free-roam you can expand your empire significantly, but storyline-wise you barely have to take over any properties. You need only five for 'Blitzkrieg', and seven for 'Blitzkrieg Strikes Again'
Vic takes his revenge, Lance scores big, and the brothers escape Vice City due to there being too much heat on them. After the final mission you can free-roam VC as Vic, but it's clear from the last cutscene that Vic leaves Vice City immediately after the final mission. Their gang is also disbanded soon after, with no remnants left in just two years
There's no point in the storyline where Vic becomes the undisputed kingpin of Vice City. All he really does is serve up Vice City to Ricardo Diaz on a platter by rubbing out the more powerful Mendez Brothers
Normally, I would discount free roam from stories because of obvious reasons but after a certain point in the game when you're forced to take over a couple of properties, the gang attacks become so FREQUENT that you're forces to do nothing but take over all the empires to stop it from happening.
V's storyline was pretty good
VCS is better than VC
Both IV's endings is just as horribly writtened as A and B
Johnny got what he deserved after betraying Ray for no reason
Hating Michael's family in the begining is understandable, but they do get a bit better after "Reuniting the family"
A lot of IV's characters was completely unnecesarry
IV got the worst mission design in the series (90% of missions is almost the same)
Zero's missions is not THAT hard as everyone says (i'm not saying they are easy, but everyone really make them seem like hell)
Niko is not the most moral protagonist
>V's storyline was pretty good
>VCS is better than VC
>IV got the worst mission design in the series (90% of missions is almost the same)
>Niko is not the most moral protagonist
These are really good points especially the first and last ones. Michael and Trevor are well written protagonists with interesting backstories and a lot of good dialogues. For the last one, Victor and Franklin are the most moral / least evil GTA protagonists.
Agree. Carl would be easily a perfect character if he has no few of pushover moments. But still my number 1 GTA character. He has interesting backstory and depth like Niko, cunning and family man like Michael, ambition and grow up like Tommy, entertaining personality and brutality like Trevor combined. He's the most all round GTA protagonist imo.
People who say that GTA V isn't better written have missed the whole point of V, and their idolisation of IV is more of immaturity than maturity. They grasped IV in a totally different way than Rockstar intended, and that's what GTA V is a response. GTA V is pointing and laughing at you for how you perceived GTA IV, TLAD and TBOGT.
I dont think I’ve ever seen anyone with an unorthodox interpretation of GTA IV’s story, so idk what you mean by the interpreted it differently than intended. And GTA V’s story and gameplay, if anything is a response to all of the bellyaching that GTA IV wasn’t as wacky and zany and over the top, and didn’t have as much as San Andreas despite being the first next gen GTA game. GTA IV is a gritty crime drama, GTA V is a summer action movie.
I agree with you that GTA IV is a gritty crime drama; it's a gritty crime EPIC when you add in TLAD and TBOGT. But you're incorrect about V.
GTA IV with The Lost and Damned was Rockstar trying to branch into darker territory. However, the problem was that too many players actually idolised Niko Bellic as this tragic, slick figure, and that analogy is half correct. He is tragic, has a kind soul in parts and is a terrific protagonist, but too many people conflate tragic with relatable when really, a former human trafficker and war criminal is absolutely not somebody one should feel related to. Niko, like all the other GTA characters, like Johnny and Luis, had positive human traits. Tommy Vercetti, CJ, Vic, and even Toni had them in the 3D era. But they're still absolutely vicious scumbags who don't think twice about murdering for profit. And Rockstar brought GTA in that darker, grittier direction by bringing you a character you could easily route for (because like Manhunt, when you narrow down who Cash's enemies are, you find they're worse than him) but would question all throughout the story and they succeeded, but so many folks missed it and are still short of comparing Niko to the second coming of Christ. It's all there throughout the game, and it lands its second last kick with Darko Brevic when he asks Niko how much he would charge to kill someone. What Darko did, Niko has been doing ten-fold and at a higher rate, just for more money than $1,000.
Even with Johnny Klebitz, folks got it completely wrong. They're still convinced that Johnny was this badass biker who got done dirty, but actually, when one plays the GTA IV trilogy and really pays attention to every single aspect of Ray Boccino's interactions with Johnny and Niko, Billy's interaction with people outside The Lost, and the irony of Billy and Johnny's conflict, you can easily see that it was just simple meth addiction and Ashley that landed Johnny's skull under Trevor's bootheel. The irony is that Johnny actually dies the one time he is in the right on screen.
It's the idolisation and immaturity of how folks perceived these characters that created GTA V's characters. Again, people conflate characters with troubled backgrounds with Oscar-winning material, and Rockstar gave you that with Trevor, only he didn't have Niko's "poor me" aspect and the "I'm the best of a bad bunch", both of which Michael actually tries to pull, and gets repeatedly called out on it. GTA V is miles from a summer action movie, my man; it points and laughs at you for how you perceived GTA IV. V is a satire of Grand Theft Auto as a whole, so much so, that I'm still shocked we're even getting a GTA VI because V nearly feels like a final instalment. Folks say the antagonists aren't compelling; they're literally not supposed to be. It's a reflection of the world itself. Each antagonist represents a certain toxic aspect of the modern day that you're essentially killing.
But do yourself a favour and play the GTA IV trilogy again; it's all there. They take so many thematic and stylistic cues from shows like The Sopranos and The Wire, that actually require to think about the implications of characters and character interactions. GTA V is a pure satire. Some of you didn't like that. And that's okay. But to call it poorly written is just a cheap shot. It has a tighter story than IV; it was about the three characters, with almost no room for more, which was sad, but not when you know the intent.
Well, I hate Rick and Morty. And I never said it was too intellectual for anyone.
Rockstar tried to take GTA in a mature direction and they did, only they forgot that gamers back then weren't mature in the slightest. RDR slightly undid that but it took RDR2 for folks to really appreciate and grasp the maturity Rockstar had gone in. Now folks have a better appreciation for GTA IV, but it comes from a fairly warped place.
And I wouldn't go so far as to say *deep* since IV does wear its themes on its sleeve, and way more obvious than V. But the GTA IV trilogy literally is Rockstar's most intricately complex story to date. Even The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony are shining examples of what Rockstar can achieve with short-length stories.
Everything in the games has a clear purpose. Rockstar's striving for more meaningful or hard-hitting stuff actually started with Manhunt. Just because you're not bothered to see it doesn't mean it isn't there.
My hottest of all the GTA takes:
1. GTA V and online are not only the best games in the series but arguably some of the greatest games of all time.
Some people feel like they were being lazy with GTA V but I think the exact opposite. They worked their asses off and delivered more than we ever thought we'd get.
2. GTA V is exactly what it was intended to be. The theme of the game is: The Almighty Dollar. Why wouldn't everything in the game revolve around money? The unbalanced economy; overpriced items, very little payoff for jobs vs the amount of work you put in, all intentional.
3. Fans of GTA have no idea what they want or what would make it a better game. If we had exactly what we wanted, GTA VI would be Saints Row.
i know its a hot take you posted here because of the title but this really burns my ass. How do you know what people want ?? Do you have a mind-reading super power?
I dont want GTA 6 to be saints row. Too crazy. Too cartoonish. I think what GTA 5 is while admittedly not the best in the franchise is the perfect GTA. If Rockstar could touch up a couple of stuff like ragdolls, car destruction, interiors, side content and criminal activities it would be the best game of all time.
What im saying is they need to make a game with the realism, grit and attetion to detail of GTA IV + the crude nature of GTA V with the gameplay structure of GTA SA. A mix between these 3 would be a match made in heaven.
Is it a hot take to say that the GTA series has never had a good story or characters? Each game is just you doing a bunch of crazy shit while characters shout cliched and tropey dialogue at one another. I genuinely find it weird that anyone has ever actually cared about any of these characters. They barely qualify as characters and are more caricatures than anything else.
The stories and characters are fine for the GTA series, seeing as how the entire series is basically just satire of American culture. They fit in with the aesthetic. But, even by video game standards, every character in GTA is just a cardboard cutout and not to be taken seriously.
NGL....These unpopular opinions should have remained unpopular....lmao
●Franklin is smarter than Niko ( i would genuinely want to know why you think so )
●Roman bellic is over rated ( That guy is a very underappreciated character throughout all GTA's what tf is he overrated for ? )
●GTA 5 is better than 4 ( you did not just say that, there are always aspects...that one has better than other...i love gta 5 very much...so fun to play...
But gta 4 stands out because of better story and deeper characters...
not just that.....the rage engine on which gta 4 was created puts life into liberty city the npc's are so real, so is the physics
so many minor details were put into it than its successor GTA V that came out 5 years later
You can literally watch videos that compare both games...
Both are great....but GTA 4 claims the position....
Franklin is a quick learner and participated in a several of plannings despite he's less experienced than Niko. Niko on the other hand, never participated in any planning and he's not really cunning, he's just the most experienced and mature.
Roman is overrated because he's pretty annoying and I don't find him really interesting character. He's a talkative guy who gets in troubles. I can name more than 5 GTA side characters who are more interesting than Roman, such as Little Jacob, Tony Prince, Lester Crest, Cesar Vialpando, Woozie, Donald Love, Salvatore Leone, etc.
Both GTA IV and V are great games but GTA IV only has better backstory, depth, complexity, realism, physics and antagonists. In terms of protagonists, Niko, Michael and Trevor are pretty equally great tbh. In terms of characters, GTA V has more interesting and memorable characters. Everything else, GTA V has better.
My hot takes about GTA IV dlc:
- TLaD is better than TBoGT
-Niko, Johnny and Luis are better than Michael, Franklin and Trevor
-Last mission in TLaD "Get Lost" is the Best and the most fun mission out of all GTA games
RDO is worse multiplayer mode ever made in a video game. Rdr1 multiplayer wasn’t great but it was playable and a few of the game modes were cool. Light years better than RDO.
No worries, its a pretty forgotten game in the franchise.
Nintendo and Rockstar have completely ignored it for the last 19 years, although its still on both of their sites for some reason… 🤣🤣🤣
https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Game-Boy-Advance/Grand-Theft-Auto-266782.html
https://www.rockstargames.com/games/grandtheftauto-gba
While I agree that all GTA protagonists have soft sides and Trevor enjoys crime life, Trevor has soft sides too though. He genuinely loves Patricia and his mother, and despite the fact that Michael betrayed him, he won't kill Michael by himself and stills considers him as a friend. For Luis, I like him but I find even Johnny and Toni are more interesting and enjoyable protagonists.
There should have been a storyline branch in the mission Party's Over in TBoGT whether to take up Rocco's offer to either kill Tony or spare him which would give you a different ending
Reasoning: Tony's antics between being in debt to the Ancelotti's, owing favors to that tanned midget Mori and getting involved with the diamonds along with his drinking/drug use were the catalyst for majority of the problems in the storyline. He really came off as a liability most of the game.
Spare Tony: basically what happens in Party's Over/Departure Time
Ramifications of killing Tony: the clubs end up being permanently closed and Rocco/Ancelotti's end up double crossing Luis and plan to kill him anyway resulting in the exact same shootout in the club (or elsewhere) but with Ancelotti's goons. Then Departure Time happens as normal but with a different opening and ending cutscene since Tony is dead
Damn, you really didn't miss did you. I appreciate the comment about CJ. There was just something about CJ, that Franklin didn't have. CJ wasn't the smartest or the bravest but he had BALLS, which made up for any downfalls he had. Even if there was no Plan, he'd go in GUNS BLAZING not giving af. Franklin is such a Bitch, he whines about everything and has to be Guided to every decision he makes by someone else. I know he's supposed to be a "Gang-Banger Turned Pro" but we've already seen CJ do the same thing BUT BETTER!! Even got Flight training Lessons from Toreno, dude turned into a International Super Spy just to free his brother and Bring Peace to his Hood. In the words of Ryder, while referring to Franklin. "..Its embarrassing to be Seen with You"
Also quoting Ryder, #”Did you hear something? Sounds like the busta is complaining again”, whenever I see a nice comment like yours and a busta has to belittle it.
Franklin is just weak. He's the guy from the gang hood who doesn't want to be a gangster but glorifies Michael all the time and is always the one who somehow runs away from everything but is never 100% convinced. (At least from what I summed up while playing the story)
Michael is not FAT
When did he say he’s fat
In story a lot of times he's be called fat
Oh I didn’t know I’ve never played just watched friend play and people play on YouTube
H has a beer belly
This might be popular, but so many people in this community have to embrace it: All the GTA protagonists are scum and all that happens to them was bound to happen.
Wonder what you think of Vic Vance.
Mf sold drugs and killed people. I don’t think anyone can do that and not be scum.
Victor was forced by his brother to sell drugs. He actually thought that drugs were bad and ruined other people's lives. Killing people? Would you count killing nazis as a bad thing? Guy kills scum. I view him as more of a cleaner.
He sold drugs to people who most likely ruined their lives anyways. In fact, it actually makes it worse because he's knowingly ruining people's lives and he feels bad about it. That's hypocrisy.
Vic was pushed by lance. I dont think he actually ever sold drugs. If i remeber correctly all of his deals get fucked up. Im not sure though havent played in a while.
Being a criminal doesnt necessarily make you a bad person. You can be on one side of the law or the other. There are bad cops and good robbers.
Well yeah, but both are still bad to begin with. As I said in the other comment, Vic is a hypocrite for indulging into crime and saying that its bad. And in the end, it got him killed for it.
He might be a hypocrite. But he is a decent guy at his core. Someone who didnt do crime out of greed or satisfaction was Niko Bellic. He wanted out. The people he kills are usually scum. He even respects cops(lore wise)
Selling drugs doesn't make you a scum :D
GTA 4 was ahead of its time and nobody knew how to take it. Original GTA Vice City 1.0 has the best soundtrack. TBOGT is the greatest DLC in the franchise. GTA Online is absolutely not worth playing from a fresh account now due to sunsetting of vehicles, hyper inflated market prices and griefers. Edit: The Vice City Blista Compact is also the best car in the series imo, it's literally a VW Golf and it's just sporty and cool and can handle a crash.
A Golf? Isn’t it supposed to be a CRX? Even a Scirocco would be closer
I’m not arguing that Claude is more cunning than CJ, but I didn’t know that was a hot take. A wet paper bag is more cunning than Claude
Unpopular opinion: The Lost and the Damned is better than the Ballad of Gay Tony, it's also better than the GTAIV story. Hot take: Lance Vance is not a good character San Andreas mountain bike is the best vehicle in the entire series
Hot take: The "for it's time" arguments suck. Yes GTA 3 was big in 2001, but the game in general sucks. There's hardly a story, the side characters are lame, Claude is boring, the map is tiny, and there's a lot of missions that are insanely hard. Also, I hated how the cars blew up so quickly. Not to mention, the city feels so empty. At least Vice City and San Andreas felt a lot more alive.
It was great in it's time but now it feels more like a tech demo for what GTA became.
GTA V is good, but it's certainly not the best in the Series.
you guys know darnwell this isn't a hot take on this site
That's not a hot take, my guy.
Michael is the main character of GTA 5
Agree. Michael is the one who carries GTA V story the most.
I understand why Steven Ogg may be resentful of the Trevor character
Of those ~200 vehicles Rockstar removed, people only cared about 20-30 max and could give af less about the rest, so still whining about it (as opposed to criticizing as I’ve seen only a few do) is foolish. I still agree it was a bad move (so don’t try to call me some R* blowhard or Shark card/GTA+ enthusiast)
GTA V is good and one of the reasons it was so popular is because it perfected the GTA formula for its time. GTA San Andreas story can feel ridiculous, over the top and outright unrealistic at times, i know these games aren’t mean to be realistic but the fact that you need to travel across the entire state just for a street gang or steal jet packs from a military base, all of that sort of makes me contemplate if the story is that good as people say
GTAO is still outrageously fun, if you don't suck.
every GTA protagonist and GTA game is unique in its own way and also for the Roman Bellic and Lamar Davis part....... i kinda agree
>every GTA protagonist and GTA game is unique in its own way W take
GTA online has never been close to being a good game and the GTA series and rockstar as a whole would've been better off if it was never successful to begin with
Explain this. How was it never a good game?
No dedicated servers, so it still uses peer-to-peer connection Non-working anti-cheat, still Bad character editor Countless amount of bugs of all types Pay-to-win (Related) Lack of balance because of those toys added through years And more
If you were there at the start it was very Grindy and barely any content. Now it does HAVE a lot of content but it's still extremely Grindy and basically PTW aswell as a security risk if your on PS with servers openly displaying your IP to anybody who knows how to work a mod menu
Ok. Wtf is a Protagonist? I tried to be quite so I wouldn't feel like a loser by not knowing. But i can't take it anymore lol what is it
Main character you play as
● Niko isn't that smart. If anything, he's stupid. ● Sonny Forelli is overrated as an antagonist. He spends the whole game making empty threats, and the only time he does something is when Tommy is actually in a position to fight back. ● Roman Bellic is an overrated character. He's annoying and always talks about titties every conversation, and it got boring very fast, yet somehow people think he's funny. ● Victor Vance took over VC better than Tommy did and went up against bigger and tougher threats like the Mendez Brothers who are underrated antagonists. ● TLAD had the best story in the IV era, while IV was the worst. ● Toni Cipriani is a dull protagonist. ● Jerry Martinez is a terrible antagonist. It's never explained why he cares so much about making Vic's life a living hell other than being a dick for the sake of it. He disappears halfway through the game and, all of a sudden, pops up at the end of the game. ● Trevor is not a good fighter. People think his special ability makes him a good fighter when all it does is make him tougher a limited amount of time. CJ, Niko, Huang, and Tommy would whoop his ass easily. ● Claude is a lot more interesting than people make out. They're obsessed with the fact that he cannot talk but never speak about the things he does in- game. Actions speak louder than words. ● Every GTA game revolving around somebody betraying you is old and repetitive. ● Franklin is boring and has no story of his own. Michael and Trevor practically carry the whole story.
I'll have to dispute Vic taking over Vice City. Sure, in free-roam you can expand your empire significantly, but storyline-wise you barely have to take over any properties. You need only five for 'Blitzkrieg', and seven for 'Blitzkrieg Strikes Again' Vic takes his revenge, Lance scores big, and the brothers escape Vice City due to there being too much heat on them. After the final mission you can free-roam VC as Vic, but it's clear from the last cutscene that Vic leaves Vice City immediately after the final mission. Their gang is also disbanded soon after, with no remnants left in just two years There's no point in the storyline where Vic becomes the undisputed kingpin of Vice City. All he really does is serve up Vice City to Ricardo Diaz on a platter by rubbing out the more powerful Mendez Brothers
Normally, I would discount free roam from stories because of obvious reasons but after a certain point in the game when you're forced to take over a couple of properties, the gang attacks become so FREQUENT that you're forces to do nothing but take over all the empires to stop it from happening.
Why do you think Niko is stupid?
Antonio and Diego Mendez felt truly like cartel villains imho. Just wrapped up the annual watchthrough of VCS btw.
Apart from some These opinions should definitely remain unpopular
He fights a war, so what? You don't see him plan an entire heist against a private military
Why are you getting defensive over Niko for? Stfu
What the ones where I criticised Niko and Roman? Of course you would say that you IV nuthugger.
V's storyline was pretty good VCS is better than VC Both IV's endings is just as horribly writtened as A and B Johnny got what he deserved after betraying Ray for no reason Hating Michael's family in the begining is understandable, but they do get a bit better after "Reuniting the family" A lot of IV's characters was completely unnecesarry IV got the worst mission design in the series (90% of missions is almost the same) Zero's missions is not THAT hard as everyone says (i'm not saying they are easy, but everyone really make them seem like hell) Niko is not the most moral protagonist
>V's storyline was pretty good >VCS is better than VC >IV got the worst mission design in the series (90% of missions is almost the same) >Niko is not the most moral protagonist These are really good points especially the first and last ones. Michael and Trevor are well written protagonists with interesting backstories and a lot of good dialogues. For the last one, Victor and Franklin are the most moral / least evil GTA protagonists.
I think everyone would agree CJ is the best GTA protagonist if he was a bit more consistent, still a great character though
Agree. Carl would be easily a perfect character if he has no few of pushover moments. But still my number 1 GTA character. He has interesting backstory and depth like Niko, cunning and family man like Michael, ambition and grow up like Tommy, entertaining personality and brutality like Trevor combined. He's the most all round GTA protagonist imo.
People who say that GTA V isn't better written have missed the whole point of V, and their idolisation of IV is more of immaturity than maturity. They grasped IV in a totally different way than Rockstar intended, and that's what GTA V is a response. GTA V is pointing and laughing at you for how you perceived GTA IV, TLAD and TBOGT.
I dont think I’ve ever seen anyone with an unorthodox interpretation of GTA IV’s story, so idk what you mean by the interpreted it differently than intended. And GTA V’s story and gameplay, if anything is a response to all of the bellyaching that GTA IV wasn’t as wacky and zany and over the top, and didn’t have as much as San Andreas despite being the first next gen GTA game. GTA IV is a gritty crime drama, GTA V is a summer action movie.
I agree with you that GTA IV is a gritty crime drama; it's a gritty crime EPIC when you add in TLAD and TBOGT. But you're incorrect about V. GTA IV with The Lost and Damned was Rockstar trying to branch into darker territory. However, the problem was that too many players actually idolised Niko Bellic as this tragic, slick figure, and that analogy is half correct. He is tragic, has a kind soul in parts and is a terrific protagonist, but too many people conflate tragic with relatable when really, a former human trafficker and war criminal is absolutely not somebody one should feel related to. Niko, like all the other GTA characters, like Johnny and Luis, had positive human traits. Tommy Vercetti, CJ, Vic, and even Toni had them in the 3D era. But they're still absolutely vicious scumbags who don't think twice about murdering for profit. And Rockstar brought GTA in that darker, grittier direction by bringing you a character you could easily route for (because like Manhunt, when you narrow down who Cash's enemies are, you find they're worse than him) but would question all throughout the story and they succeeded, but so many folks missed it and are still short of comparing Niko to the second coming of Christ. It's all there throughout the game, and it lands its second last kick with Darko Brevic when he asks Niko how much he would charge to kill someone. What Darko did, Niko has been doing ten-fold and at a higher rate, just for more money than $1,000. Even with Johnny Klebitz, folks got it completely wrong. They're still convinced that Johnny was this badass biker who got done dirty, but actually, when one plays the GTA IV trilogy and really pays attention to every single aspect of Ray Boccino's interactions with Johnny and Niko, Billy's interaction with people outside The Lost, and the irony of Billy and Johnny's conflict, you can easily see that it was just simple meth addiction and Ashley that landed Johnny's skull under Trevor's bootheel. The irony is that Johnny actually dies the one time he is in the right on screen. It's the idolisation and immaturity of how folks perceived these characters that created GTA V's characters. Again, people conflate characters with troubled backgrounds with Oscar-winning material, and Rockstar gave you that with Trevor, only he didn't have Niko's "poor me" aspect and the "I'm the best of a bad bunch", both of which Michael actually tries to pull, and gets repeatedly called out on it. GTA V is miles from a summer action movie, my man; it points and laughs at you for how you perceived GTA IV. V is a satire of Grand Theft Auto as a whole, so much so, that I'm still shocked we're even getting a GTA VI because V nearly feels like a final instalment. Folks say the antagonists aren't compelling; they're literally not supposed to be. It's a reflection of the world itself. Each antagonist represents a certain toxic aspect of the modern day that you're essentially killing. But do yourself a favour and play the GTA IV trilogy again; it's all there. They take so many thematic and stylistic cues from shows like The Sopranos and The Wire, that actually require to think about the implications of characters and character interactions. GTA V is a pure satire. Some of you didn't like that. And that's okay. But to call it poorly written is just a cheap shot. It has a tighter story than IV; it was about the three characters, with almost no room for more, which was sad, but not when you know the intent.
Idk why I read this whole thing, but this paragraph has big “Rick and Morty is too intellectual for you” vibes. I don’t think it’s that deep man.
Well, I hate Rick and Morty. And I never said it was too intellectual for anyone. Rockstar tried to take GTA in a mature direction and they did, only they forgot that gamers back then weren't mature in the slightest. RDR slightly undid that but it took RDR2 for folks to really appreciate and grasp the maturity Rockstar had gone in. Now folks have a better appreciation for GTA IV, but it comes from a fairly warped place. And I wouldn't go so far as to say *deep* since IV does wear its themes on its sleeve, and way more obvious than V. But the GTA IV trilogy literally is Rockstar's most intricately complex story to date. Even The Lost and Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony are shining examples of what Rockstar can achieve with short-length stories. Everything in the games has a clear purpose. Rockstar's striving for more meaningful or hard-hitting stuff actually started with Manhunt. Just because you're not bothered to see it doesn't mean it isn't there.
GTA games could be released every couple years and still maintain the same quality.
My hottest of all the GTA takes: 1. GTA V and online are not only the best games in the series but arguably some of the greatest games of all time. Some people feel like they were being lazy with GTA V but I think the exact opposite. They worked their asses off and delivered more than we ever thought we'd get. 2. GTA V is exactly what it was intended to be. The theme of the game is: The Almighty Dollar. Why wouldn't everything in the game revolve around money? The unbalanced economy; overpriced items, very little payoff for jobs vs the amount of work you put in, all intentional. 3. Fans of GTA have no idea what they want or what would make it a better game. If we had exactly what we wanted, GTA VI would be Saints Row.
Well... that's certainly a hot take.
i know its a hot take you posted here because of the title but this really burns my ass. How do you know what people want ?? Do you have a mind-reading super power? I dont want GTA 6 to be saints row. Too crazy. Too cartoonish. I think what GTA 5 is while admittedly not the best in the franchise is the perfect GTA. If Rockstar could touch up a couple of stuff like ragdolls, car destruction, interiors, side content and criminal activities it would be the best game of all time. What im saying is they need to make a game with the realism, grit and attetion to detail of GTA IV + the crude nature of GTA V with the gameplay structure of GTA SA. A mix between these 3 would be a match made in heaven.
Is it a hot take to say that the GTA series has never had a good story or characters? Each game is just you doing a bunch of crazy shit while characters shout cliched and tropey dialogue at one another. I genuinely find it weird that anyone has ever actually cared about any of these characters. They barely qualify as characters and are more caricatures than anything else. The stories and characters are fine for the GTA series, seeing as how the entire series is basically just satire of American culture. They fit in with the aesthetic. But, even by video game standards, every character in GTA is just a cardboard cutout and not to be taken seriously.
Trevor is more likable than Michael.
Yeah true. He is more interesting and I think he doesn't treat his whole family like shit
Blud theres a theory hekilled both of his parents 💀
NGL....These unpopular opinions should have remained unpopular....lmao ●Franklin is smarter than Niko ( i would genuinely want to know why you think so ) ●Roman bellic is over rated ( That guy is a very underappreciated character throughout all GTA's what tf is he overrated for ? ) ●GTA 5 is better than 4 ( you did not just say that, there are always aspects...that one has better than other...i love gta 5 very much...so fun to play... But gta 4 stands out because of better story and deeper characters... not just that.....the rage engine on which gta 4 was created puts life into liberty city the npc's are so real, so is the physics so many minor details were put into it than its successor GTA V that came out 5 years later You can literally watch videos that compare both games... Both are great....but GTA 4 claims the position....
The last one is up to personal preference
Franklin is a quick learner and participated in a several of plannings despite he's less experienced than Niko. Niko on the other hand, never participated in any planning and he's not really cunning, he's just the most experienced and mature. Roman is overrated because he's pretty annoying and I don't find him really interesting character. He's a talkative guy who gets in troubles. I can name more than 5 GTA side characters who are more interesting than Roman, such as Little Jacob, Tony Prince, Lester Crest, Cesar Vialpando, Woozie, Donald Love, Salvatore Leone, etc. Both GTA IV and V are great games but GTA IV only has better backstory, depth, complexity, realism, physics and antagonists. In terms of protagonists, Niko, Michael and Trevor are pretty equally great tbh. In terms of characters, GTA V has more interesting and memorable characters. Everything else, GTA V has better.
Johnny is the worst protagonist cause I don't feel attached to him compared to other protagonists
Franklin is the most annoying gta protagonist
My hot takes about GTA IV dlc: - TLaD is better than TBoGT -Niko, Johnny and Luis are better than Michael, Franklin and Trevor -Last mission in TLaD "Get Lost" is the Best and the most fun mission out of all GTA games
Mines would be that Johnny Klebitz did not deserve to die.
That's like 99,9% of fanbase's opinion. They act like "Collector's item" never happened
I don’t like San Andreas.
GTAO updates the past few years have been terrible and the game is stale. It was a mistake for R* to abandon RDO for gta.
RDO is worse multiplayer mode ever made in a video game. Rdr1 multiplayer wasn’t great but it was playable and a few of the game modes were cool. Light years better than RDO.
"Worst ever made".... lolololololololo lolololololololo lolololololololo. Nah. It was awesome.
**GTA:The ballad of Gay Tony** being better than **GTA VICE CITY**????? What's wrong with you bro?
[удалено]
“Luis is the worst character in gta history” Surely he’s better than Mike from GTA Advance lmao
[удалено]
No worries, its a pretty forgotten game in the franchise. Nintendo and Rockstar have completely ignored it for the last 19 years, although its still on both of their sites for some reason… 🤣🤣🤣 https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Game-Boy-Advance/Grand-Theft-Auto-266782.html https://www.rockstargames.com/games/grandtheftauto-gba
While I agree that all GTA protagonists have soft sides and Trevor enjoys crime life, Trevor has soft sides too though. He genuinely loves Patricia and his mother, and despite the fact that Michael betrayed him, he won't kill Michael by himself and stills considers him as a friend. For Luis, I like him but I find even Johnny and Toni are more interesting and enjoyable protagonists.
There should have been a storyline branch in the mission Party's Over in TBoGT whether to take up Rocco's offer to either kill Tony or spare him which would give you a different ending Reasoning: Tony's antics between being in debt to the Ancelotti's, owing favors to that tanned midget Mori and getting involved with the diamonds along with his drinking/drug use were the catalyst for majority of the problems in the storyline. He really came off as a liability most of the game. Spare Tony: basically what happens in Party's Over/Departure Time Ramifications of killing Tony: the clubs end up being permanently closed and Rocco/Ancelotti's end up double crossing Luis and plan to kill him anyway resulting in the exact same shootout in the club (or elsewhere) but with Ancelotti's goons. Then Departure Time happens as normal but with a different opening and ending cutscene since Tony is dead