Why does this receive so much hate?

  • 95 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for KurDt
#1 Edited by Mikewrestler5 (638 posts) -

 I don't understand the hate.
 
This game is arguably the biggest, best game of this decade. It brought a lot of things to the table and delivered on all fronts. Why do people hate this masterpiece? Is it too slow for them? Is it because all of the "fun" things that were in San Andreas are absent (excluding DLC)?  Please, inform me. I'd like to know.
 
GTA IV is full of detail. So much so that I'm still discovering things three years after its release. Has anyone followed an NPC that's on a cell phone and listened to their conversations? It's remarkable. That's just ONE of the many, many examples of how detailed this game is. You just don't find the amount of detail and care in any other games.

Avatar image for synthballs
#2 Posted by Synthballs (2222 posts) -
It just wasn't fun enough? 
 
That's just my opinion.  
 
Saints Row 2 was superior in every way except graphics (And it had a few physics fuck ups)
Avatar image for jadeskye
#3 Posted by Jadeskye (4392 posts) -

GTA4 was great but i wouldn't call it the best game of the decade or the biggest for that matter. Time to move on and look towards GTA5.

Avatar image for fancysoapsman
#4 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5917 posts) -

The controls just made it a chore to play IMO.
 
Not a bad game, but definitely not a perfect 10.

Avatar image for KurDt
#5 Posted by Mikewrestler5 (638 posts) -
@Synthballs said:
" It just wasn't fun enough?  That's just my opinion.   Saints Row 2 was superior in every way except graphics (And it had a few physics fuck ups) "
Compared to GTA IV, Saints Row 2 felt so last-gen. The physics in GTA IV are revolutionary. That's one of the best technical aspects of the game.
Avatar image for hero_swe
#6 Posted by Hero_Swe (1293 posts) -

Well the PC port was an epic failure of gigantic proportions. Other then that, eh.
Avatar image for jadeskye
#7 Posted by Jadeskye (4392 posts) -
@Mikewrestler5 said:
" @Synthballs said:
" It just wasn't fun enough?  That's just my opinion.   Saints Row 2 was superior in every way except graphics (And it had a few physics fuck ups) "
Compared to GTA IV, Saints Row 2 felt so last-gen. The physics in GTA IV are revolutionary. That's one of the best technical aspects of the game. "
yeah it uses the euphoria physics/animation engine, so does backbreaker and a few other games, are we handing out game of the year awards based on middleware now?
Avatar image for daftdethmonkey
#8 Posted by daftdethmonkey (46 posts) -

I think most of the backlash was due to people expecting it to be more like San Andreas.

Avatar image for tobbrobb
#9 Posted by TobbRobb (5909 posts) -

The missions were incredibly repetitive, the story wasn't interesting, none of the characters were likable, none of the sidestuff was fun, combat flat out sucked. The only thing I enjoyed was running people over and other physics related stuff "swingset loool". Never finished the game, never intend to.
 
Before people tell me I didn't give it a chance I actually played up to (see spoiler) before giving up.

Avatar image for animasta
#10 Posted by Animasta (14898 posts) -
@daftdethmonkey said:
" I think most of the backlash was due to people expecting it to be more like San Andreas. "
which is twice as fun as GTAIV.
Avatar image for jimbo
#11 Posted by Jimbo (10460 posts) -

The gameplay was alright.  I found it jarring how the tone would go from one extreme to the other on a dime, seemingly at random.

Avatar image for xalienxgreyx
#12 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2646 posts) -

Wrong forum, you meant to put this on Metal Gear Solid 4
Avatar image for pweidman
#13 Posted by pweidman (2577 posts) -

Because it was overhyped, and came out with fundamental flaws.  The scores that were pretty much universally awesome were just baffling to me....or.....
Avatar image for synthballs
#14 Posted by Synthballs (2222 posts) -
@jadeskye said:

" @Mikewrestler5 said:

" @Synthballs said:
" It just wasn't fun enough?  That's just my opinion.   Saints Row 2 was superior in every way except graphics (And it had a few physics fuck ups) "
Compared to GTA IV, Saints Row 2 felt so last-gen. The physics in GTA IV are revolutionary. That's one of the best technical aspects of the game. "
yeah it uses the euphoria physics/animation engine, so does backbreaker and a few other games, are we handing out game of the year awards based on middleware now? "
Physics doesn't make fun.
Avatar image for simplexity
#15 Posted by Simplexity (1430 posts) -

It was a very good game, but I enjoyed San Andreas and Vice City more The forced drama also didn't sit all that well with me, and did not impact me even half as much as it apparantly did with every reviewer ever.

Avatar image for mr_skeleton
#16 Posted by Mr_Skeleton (5195 posts) -

I wouldn't call one of the highest rated games ever hated.

Avatar image for rockanomics
#17 Posted by Rockanomics (1187 posts) -

It the same with everything else in the world, if something is loved a lot by certain people, then those that don't "get it" have to hate it just as hard. 
 
That said I got to the last mission and failed it like 10 times in a row, never finished it. I had my moments but the game was pretty boring overall.

Avatar image for kittenmitten
#18 Posted by KittenMitten (115 posts) -

GTA IV and Saints Row 2 are both incredibly flawed games. GTA IV has horrible controls and a story that peaked way too early and fell farther than I thought was possible. Saints Row 2 had pretty good shooting and at no point took itself seriously. 
 
I'm not saying I didn't have fun with GTA IV, but if, like me, you loved all the crazy shit you could do in San Andreas, then you were probably immensely bummed out when you tried to hijack an airplane only to find out you couldn't.  My preference definitely lies in SR2, though I will always play Rockstar's games. 
 
In no way was GTA IV anywhere near game of the decade.

Avatar image for KurDt
#19 Posted by Mikewrestler5 (638 posts) -
@Synthballs said:
" @jadeskye said:

" @Mikewrestler5 said:

" @Synthballs said:
" It just wasn't fun enough?  That's just my opinion.   Saints Row 2 was superior in every way except graphics (And it had a few physics fuck ups) "
Compared to GTA IV, Saints Row 2 felt so last-gen. The physics in GTA IV are revolutionary. That's one of the best technical aspects of the game. "
yeah it uses the euphoria physics/animation engine, so does backbreaker and a few other games, are we handing out game of the year awards based on middleware now? "
Physics doesn't make fun. "
I disagree. Had San Andreas had physics, I'd still be playing it. Those canned animations are terribly dated.
Avatar image for trebz
#20 Posted by Trebz (488 posts) -

I actually adored GTAIV; it's one of my favorite games of this generation. Most critics seemed to love it too. I think a lot of people didn't like it because it took itself way too seriously while still trying to be "wacky." If Rockstar continues down that road for GTAV, I'm absolutely fine with that. Saints' Row 3 is going to be out later this year and I think it's been established that Saints' Row is this generation's GTAIII.

Avatar image for nasar7
#21 Posted by Nasar7 (3209 posts) -

I think this is a case of the minority who don't like it shouting louder than the majority who do. I got this game at the midnight launch and loved it. It's a critical darling (98 on metacritic) and I don't remember anyone speaking badly about it when it came out. Once again, its just cool to hate on popular things.

Avatar image for sethphotopoulos
#22 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5777 posts) -

Cause forums yo.  The place where the minority is loudest.

Avatar image for vierastalo
#23 Posted by VierasTalo (1307 posts) -

I didn't like it because, as probably already mentioned, it really goes way too damn heavy with trying to make the story poignant and realistic. It's very hard to give a crap about Nico in one mission when he's talking about killing babies in a war when in the previous one you had a blast running over someone's grandma in a convertible when trying to catch a caricatyre-ish villain.

Avatar image for x19
#24 Edited by X19 (2370 posts) -
@Mikewrestler5:  Why do you give a shit what others think? If you enjoyed it that's all that matters.
Avatar image for alistercat
#25 Posted by AlisterCat (7130 posts) -

Popular games get hated on. Plus it went in a new direction from San Andreas. I really enjoyed a more serious tone than jet packs and hot coffee.

Avatar image for monetarydread
#26 Edited by MonetaryDread (2721 posts) -

I didn't like GTA 4 because it felt like a major step back for the franchise. It had a smaller world than San Andreas, annoying story / characters, too much busy work (c'mon that cell was going off every ten minutes), less to do in comparison to San Andreas, they screwed up the driving physics, and removed the targeting system that worked so well before. 
It wasn't a bad game, it just felt like the developer sacrificed fun whenever they had to make a choice between fun and realism. (I will always prefer fun to realism in my games) 
I do enjoy the fact that this game allowed me to fuck around online with friends, although I think other games have done it better.

Avatar image for sethphotopoulos
#27 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5777 posts) -
@MonetaryDread said:
" and removed the targeting system that worked so well before.  "

No Caption Provided
Avatar image for ntm
#28 Edited by NTM (9544 posts) -

Literally the only thing I don't like about GTA4, is that there aren't any checkpoints, so every time you lose at a mission you have to go back and use your cellphone to get back to the beginning of the mission. It lessens my motivation to go through missions. I wish they'd remake Vice City (and I'm sure San Andreas would be a nice addition too), because as great as it is still, it's very out-dated. It's actually kind of hard to play Vice City. 
 
  

                                                                                                                           Just had to add this.
Avatar image for arbitrarywater
#29 Posted by ArbitraryWater (14465 posts) -

I don't think it's so much popularity backlash as it is Internet Revisionism. The last 3 years haven't been especially kind to GTA 4 from a gameplay angle, and like a lot of other games (See: Jade Empire, Final Fantasy VIII) it's not quite as well remembered as it otherwise would be. Personally, I have no opinion, because I've never played GTA 4 and don't really care to.

Avatar image for cameron
#30 Posted by Cameron (814 posts) -

People like to hate on popular things. Look at how many people bash on Halo and Call of Duty. I don't really like either series, but they are by no means bad games. Anyone who thinks these games are bad needs to go play some Bomberman Zero or Drake of the 99 Dragons to see what a bad game really looks like. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it is bad.
 
I think people expected GTA IV to the greatest game ever made by a huge margin, and then when it didn't achieve that impossible goal they started hating on it. I loved GTA IV, it's not perfect, but it was a huge leap forward in open world games. They created a city that felt real and no one had ever done that nearly as well before.

Avatar image for haggis
#31 Edited by haggis (1674 posts) -

There was a good game in there somewhere. Underneath all the crap they piled on top of it. Best game of the decade? Not even close. The controls were screwy, the plot boring, and the missions repetitive. The general game design and ideas were fine, hampered by some annoying gameplay choices, including all the hanging out "missions." GTAIV was clearly a case of ambition overshadowing fundamentals. It wasn't a bad game by any means, just not great. I can't help but think that the game was crippled by a lack of focus. That's not hate, though, just criticism.
 
@ArbitraryWater said:

"... The last 3 years haven't been especially kind to GTA 4 from a gameplay angle, and like a lot of other games (See: Jade Empire, Final Fantasy VIII) it's not quite as well remembered as it otherwise would be..."
I think this is part of it. Reviews come out, the reviewers haven't spent as much time playing the game at review time as we have now, long after the fact, and we've had time to let things settle in. I remember a lot of glowing reviews at the time, but I also remember a lot of the same complaints we hear now. Truth is, most of those who criticize the game aren't "hating" on it. I rarely see anyone say GTAIV is a bad game outright.
Avatar image for fiestaunicorn
#32 Posted by FiestaUnicorn (1672 posts) -

I loved GTA4 but they really need to fix the controls.  It's too much of a hassle getting through a door sometimes and repeatedly tapping the A button to run is annoying.
Avatar image for surkov
#33 Posted by Surkov (1019 posts) -

I still think it's one of the best games of this generation. The physics engine and attention detail set this game apart from others for sure.   
Even the multiplayer was fun, if you turned off the auto-aim. Street racing was great online. 
 
Also the DLC for GTA4 was fantastic. All the people who wished that GTA stayed like San Andreas should go play GTA4: The Ballad of Gay Tony. 

Avatar image for i_smell
#34 Edited by I_smell (4219 posts) -

It sucks because
    

   
Niko is all "I don't want to kill anyone! How do I get into all these bad situations? It's not my fault!" then as soon as you fire a gun he literally roars. Like a dinosaur. and says COME AND GET ME YOU FUCKERS! I'M NIKO BELLIC!
Also the humour is all dumb as shit. It's poop jokes, gay jokes, jokes about how celebrities totally like to do drugs- the railroad company is BROWN STREAK RAIL, the donut shop is CRUSTY BROWNs or some shit. I'm so bored of it. A guy with a faggy voice stopped being funny when I turned 12.
And a lot of people don't like the driving, it's how most other games would control if you were driving on ice. Sometimes I like it cos it feels more genuine and dangerous like if you were driving a real car at 70mph; but sometimes it's just annoying when you miss a turn and spin out. 
Also the missions REALLY don't hold up for how long this game is. Why do they still have so many DON'T GO TOO FAST missions? Everyone hates those. And how many times can you really get a car and bring it back somewhere? They're all missions you've done loads of times before in other GTA games, and they're all back again.

@Mikewrestler5

said:

" Has anyone followed an NPC that's on a cell phone and listened to their conversations? It's remarkable. That's just ONE of the many, many examples of how detailed this game is. You just don't find the amount of detail and care in any other games. "

I played it today and when I got out of my car I noticed a cop had pulled someone over on the side of the road and was looking through their car trunk. He found some drugs and arrested the guy, it was pretty awesome.
While I was watching; some driver hit me, stopped, got out of his car and apologised.
Avatar image for vinny_says
#35 Posted by Vinny_Says (5912 posts) -

It was the only GTA game I ever finished, EVERY SINGLE ONE ,even the DS one (chinatown wars), just ends up with me losing interest half way through. Take that for what you will.

Avatar image for jakob187
#36 Edited by jakob187 (22861 posts) -

For a lot of people, they hate it because it's popular.  Everyone knows it's cool to hate things that are popular. 
 
For me, I loved the game when it first came out.  Eventually, it started overstaying its welcome a little too much.  There was far too much to do, and that stuff didn't seem focused on the things that I wanted to do.  I don't want to take a date to the fucking bowling alley.  This is a game called Grand Theft Auto.  I want to drive cars around and kill shit in a mafioso story.  I want a little interaction with the world around me and the characters, and some side missions help with that.  However, there are just things that went too far in that game.  More than that, the problem was how clunky the controls felt, how convoluted the story was, and how shallow a good handful of the characters in the game were upon further investigation. 
 
Essentially, I feel like Rockstar was better than that game.  Red Dead Redemption...and even something like Bully...prove that pretty damn well. 
 
Also, I think that Saint's Row 2 pretty much impressed me more all around with its brand of craziness.

Avatar image for i_smell
#37 Posted by I_smell (4219 posts) -

Also I can't remember a single song on any of those radio stations, except that Queen song and the Serbian gypsy one.
 
I LOVED the other soundtracks.

Avatar image for KurDt
#38 Posted by Mikewrestler5 (638 posts) -
@I_smell said:
" Also I can't remember a single song on any of those radio stations, except that Queen song and the Serbian gypsy one.  I LOVED the other soundtracks. "
That's one thing that, at least in my opinion, the previous iterations of GTA did better. The radio is GTA IV wasn't that memorable at all.
Avatar image for liquids
#39 Posted by LiquidS (979 posts) -

Check Points... I really wanted to finish and enjoy the game but damn.. nothing more annoying than restarting 20minutes earlier.

Avatar image for alexw00d
#40 Posted by AlexW00d (7403 posts) -
@jakob187 said:
" For a lot of people, they hate it because it's popular.  Everyone knows it's cool to hate things that are popular. "
Is this even true? This thread is full of people saying that they didn't really like it and giving fair reasons. 
 
I for one played it through, just because I don't leaving a game unfinished, even though from about half way through it felt like a huge chore. There were no memorable missions in that game, the characters were all annoying/whiny, the story was poor to the extent I can't remember any of it, and even though they but so much detail into it it felt awfully small. Also the combat sucked and driving was off. But we all know you only dislike things to be cool so pay no attention to me.
Avatar image for raviolisumo
#41 Posted by RavioliSumo (2186 posts) -

I had never played GTA before so I loved this one.

Avatar image for delroylindo
#42 Posted by DelroyLindo (387 posts) -
@Synthballs said:
" It just wasn't fun enough?  That's just my opinion.   Saints Row 2 was superior in every way except graphics (And it had a few physics fuck ups) "
Pretty much my thoughts. I just didnt find gta iv entertaining. Saints row 2 on the other hand was completely over the top and ridiculous and i had a blast.
Avatar image for warlordpayne
#43 Posted by WarlordPayne (742 posts) -

I hated the driving, the music, and the constant cell phone calls.  They put in too much stuff for the sake of  "realism" at the cost of fun, toll booths for instance.  I don't like the turn towards trying to make GTA more serious.  I hated the story, and most characters, in San Andreas for the same reason, but that game was at least fun mechanically.  I don't play GTA for moving drama or realistic driving physics, I play it for stupid fun. 
 
Also, for Niko's constant insistence that he wanted to change and didn't want to do bad things anymore he seemed more than eager to do every horrible thing anyone asked of him.

Avatar image for nictel
#44 Posted by Nictel (2695 posts) -

I don't hate it, I just got bored with it. Driving around in previous GTA's was fun in this it was just boring. Not sure why. I will probably never finish it.

Avatar image for dystopiax
#45 Posted by DystopiaX (5568 posts) -

Some people didn't like the more serious tone it took and just wanted the funny, crazy shit San Andreas (and now Saints Row) have/had. I liked it personally, but I can see the ups and downs of both games. I liked Saints row 2 (minus all the mandatory side quest bullshit, if I want to play those I'll do it, if I don't why the hell are you forcing me?) but thought the feel of the world/the action, and yes, the driving (after I got used to it) of GTAIV was excellently done as well. 
I'd like GTAV to go down the GTAIV route and fulfill the serious open world game need I have, and for Saints row to do the bigger and more crazy shit that it's been doing. You get the best of both worlds then.

Avatar image for akrid
#46 Posted by Akrid (1391 posts) -

I'm of the opinion that though it may not be the game of the decade, it is without a doubt an important one.  It went in brave and bold new directions, which can partially explain why it's so polarizing.

Avatar image for kamikazecaterpillar
#47 Posted by KamikazeCaterpillar (1160 posts) -

I thought the mission design was lackluster in most spots and actually playing it turned out be a chore most of the time. I thought what I saw of the story was really good but I just couldn't go any further.

Avatar image for privateirontfu
#48 Posted by PrivateIronTFU (3858 posts) -

It earned its praise, I think. Most critics seem to agree with that opinion.

Avatar image for brendan
#49 Posted by Brendan (8952 posts) -

This game got rave reviews and won several GOTY awards in 2008, so you'll excuse me if I'm a little confused at this thread...

Avatar image for jakob187
#50 Posted by jakob187 (22861 posts) -
@AlexW00d said:
" @jakob187 said:
" For a lot of people, they hate it because it's popular.  Everyone knows it's cool to hate things that are popular. "
Is this even true? This thread is full of people saying that they didn't really like it and giving fair reasons."
Then somehow, on this day, a thread has come into existence that contains intelligent people who practice logic on the internet.  You should probably put this fucker on eBay!  lol

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.