Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy – The Definitive Edition - GTA 3 trilogy remaster

[SharkClub]

Haha, I got him bros! Because he doesn't see the immense value in gameplay of instant drowning the second you touch water that must mean he wants to delete half of the game. If only the map was surrounded by lava and not water, then he wouldn't have any argument at all! Then everyone clapped when I proved him wrong by applying the slippery slope fallacy to what he said. Thanks for the gold, kind stranger!

Literal midwit level of argumentation.

 

[Ash]

I'm not arguing, I'm telling you what's what and how you're decline enabling. Just shoehorning in swimming so you don't fall to your death like an idiot is not gonna cut it. Either they leave it as it is (or make minor tweaks as I suggested), or make up for the dumbing down in some way with some actual game design instead of being a casual stroll through town simulator. But by all means, if you enjoy boring shit you go ahead and impose further decline, nothing I ever say or do puts a stop to it. Been watching my beloved hobby get destroyed for decades now by fucktards and sellouts that have zero design sense or integrity, and every remake of my many favorites opting to dumb shit down for mass consumption...but hey I have the original game at least.

 

[Alphons]

But GTAs are

casual stroll through town simulator

?

actually have risks and consequences

You lose $100 and your guns. Wow.

 

[anvi]

I think once you reach the top of the food chain you can act like Bethesda and release the same game over and over with tweaks. Nobody else can compete.

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

Compared to....what? RPGs? Sure. However in the open world action genre San Andreas is one of the more notable games in this regard. Certainly way more gameplay depth and complexity to GTAV/RDR2 and the majority of the modern shit.
If you just went back to GTA3 and gave up I could understand, it is a bit barebones, never thought much of it back in the day and still don't, but with each sequel they got deeper and more complex culminating with San Andreas and then it was all decline from there. That said, San Andreas is by no means this deep complex highly engaging game, and the combat really needs a polish up. but I struggle to think of much of anything better in the open word action genre (unless you bring RPG into the mix). Stalker and The Saboteur would be worthy competitors I suppose. I like a nu Far Cry or two but it has a lot of popamole DNA in it.

Also, golden GTA trilogy has a massive modding community...the core of the games is great in concept and mostly good in execution, but in need of updates to be truly great. You should delve into that.

Dude, I even made my own mods for GTA SA. Don't just assume stuff. It's a wonderful game, definitely the most complete game they made and the best showcase of Rockstar's capabilities at their peak. Then again, with all the things you can do in that game, there's not much you can really sink your teeth into if you've done it all before (to their credit, I remember most of it after ~20 years).

Why do I say the gameplay is mostly shallow? Most missions feel like tutorials (the Rockstar design philosophy) or are a variation of go somewhere, watch cutscene, then have a shootout or a car chase. Compare with Mercenaries, which came out around the same time (I imagine it resembles Saboteur, which I haven't played). That game gives you total freedom in how to approach any mission. You can use stealth, action or hire outside help, come at he target from any direction, etc.

Mafia, which didn't manage to avoid repetition, also gave you a lot more freedom and in general required more brainpower and initiative, being more convincing in putting you in the shoes of a gangster.

Unless I'm on a GTA nostalgia streak, I know which games I'd rather replay. For me the most important factor in replay value is allowing me to discover the game again by doings things differently, or being forced to rethink something which I thought I knew.

Again, GTA SA is an amazing game, but at some point Rockstar should've updated their design philosophy. They didn't, which means the remakes will be more of the same with some expanded functionality and pretty graphics (which I'd rather do without). That's if they don't fuck it up in typical current year fashion. I'm not saying I won't play it, but it's definitely a wait and see scenario.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Will this be on Steam from the getgo?

 

[Heroic Liberator]

And on a different note, really wish that they'd do a Bully remaster. Great gem of a game.

 

[Ash]

You lose $100 and your guns. Wow.

Typical blindness I've come to expect from the average gamer.

You lose:

-money
-mission progress (if active)
-Location progress such as when exploring and trying to get somewhere (sent to hospital)
-all weapons
-all ammo
-Armor (if any)
-your car (if any)

That is more consequence for failure than in the absolute majority of games outside of iron man-focused games or old brutally hard stuff. But the quantity or intensity of said consequences wasn't even my point in the first place, but rather that there is any risk and consequences at all.
As said, the evil death water was one of few things preventing it from often being a risk free utterly boring casual stroll through town sim like GTAV is, or most modern garbage for that matter. With it gone, when not in missions you just have to avoid running over pedestrians near cops or falling off of rooftops, that's about it. Though you can at least impose some interesting challenge by only riding motorbikes which I for sure did a lot of.

I picture the decline enablers not being far from every girl I knew that played Vice City at the time (all three of them): traffic sim. Following the flow of traffic, stopping at red lights, maybe starting the first and second mission, shortly after getting bored and then turning it off. It's interesting how they all followed this same pattern without knowing one another. Anyway, because of the way they engaged with the game, they would be completely disconnected from what I am saying (if I were to bother) and not understand at all. I guess I shouldn't give many here the benefit of the doubt either. GTA could certainly be a casual stroll through town sim if you wanted it to be, by playing with traffic and then turning it off. If you actually did the missions, stunt jumps, hidden side missions, hidden packages etc it was actually a decently challenging game. Not walking sim. If you actually played the game and content properly. That's all changed now with GTA though.

 

[Ash]

Why do I say the gameplay is mostly shallow? Most missions feel like tutorials (the Rockstar design philosophy) or are a variation of go somewhere, watch cutscene, then have a shootout or a car chase. Compare with Mercenaries, which came out around the same time (I imagine it resembles Saboteur, which I haven't played). That game gives you total freedom in how to approach any mission. You can use stealth, action or hire outside help, come at he target from any direction, etc.
.

To some very small extent you're correct, but I think you also either underestimate or understate just how flexible (some) GTA missions can be. Long time ago now so I don't remember the specifics, but I recall getting pissed at a certain mission or side mission and just grabbing my trusty apache helicopter or harrier jump jet and using that to do the mission. There's other examples, but I won't go too far because a lot of the time the missions are indeed pretty rigid in how you can approach them. Nonetheless they aren't ALL on rails or completely static.

Secondly, just because gameplay doesn't allow for multiple approaches in playstyle or angle of attack doesn't mean it is "shallow". Doom isn't shallow just because you can only run and gun not sneak attack the demons. Also what, Mercenaries didn't have properly developed stealth, very shallow implementation to the point of (almost) being worthless...usually games that offer both options excel at neither. The angle of attack likewise rarely even mattered in mercs. Geometry didn't make much difference in that game as it wasn't very varied (big vast open terrain of emptiness) and very few things acted as an obstacle aside from the much feared and maligned water; use a hill for high ground advantage, call in an airstrike, shoot a few dudes, airstrike some more and you're done. I liked Mercs but I'd definitely call it shallower, but it least it wasn't auto aim shit. That alone almost wins me over.

GTA Vice/Andreas definitely has some shallow aspects, but as a sum of its parts it is one of the more deeper (non-RPG) open world action games.

Yes, play the Sabotuer. It's also one of the better open world action games. Too bad the airstrikes are gone but at the same time it's better for it, since a lot of the time you're just pressing the awesome button and watching the fireworks in Mercs rather than actually doing impressive or skillful shit yourself. Again though, Mercs is also one of the better open world action games, but not that good.

 

[Jigby]

Unlike the later entries, 3 had C&C. Never forget.

Spoiler

 

[Roguey]

The first time I played 3, when Donald Love told me to kill Kenji I immediately reloaded because I hadn't yet completed all his missions.

My favorite thing about 3's mission design is that they hadn't yet scripted all the emergent fun out of them. Like in the mission where you're supposed to throw a molotov in a window and then a car pops out of a garage and you're supposed to chase after it, I just grabbed a bus and parked it in front of the garage so the guy couldn't get out and killed him without a chase. Or that annoying mission near the end where it expects you to shoot a plane down with a rocket on a rickety boat, I just drove to the airport and blew it up as it came in for a landing.

Meanwhile Red Dead Redemption 2 is the culmination of the antithesis of this. Stray a bit from the designer's intended vision and you automatically fail the mission.

 

[catfood]

I wish they made a new GTA with a similar structure to 2 where you chose which faction to ally with.

 

[Jigby]

The first time I played 3, when Donald Love told me to kill Kenji I immediately reloaded because I hadn't yet completed all his missions.

My favorite thing about 3's mission design is that they hadn't yet scripted all the emergent fun out of them. Like in the mission where you're supposed to throw a molotov in a window and then a car pops out of a garage and you're supposed to chase after it, I just grabbed a bus and parked it in front of the garage so the guy couldn't get out and killed him without a chase. Or that annoying mission near the end where it expects you to shoot a plane down with a rocket on a rickety boat, I just drove to the airport and blew it up as it came in for a landing.

Meanwhile Red Dead Redemption 2 is the culmination of the antithesis of this. Stray a bit from the designer's intended vision and you automatically fail the mission.

The one that I liked was in Cutting the Grass (Salvatore tells you to follow a guy in a taxi car) - only it turns out that you can park a taxi car next to the guy, the AI script sees a taxi, he enters your car. You drive him someplace else and then whack him. The whole setup reminds of that scene in Assassins. I think the AI scripts are more or less the same in the other PS2 games, so this appears even in the later games.

 

[SharkClub]

Heh! If you don't like instant death water that must mean you're a girl gamer that follows traffic and stops at red lights in GTA! Look at him and laugh bros!

Write shorter shitposts you retarded pseud.

 

[Multidirectional]

I don't recall there even being that many places you could drown in VC. Don't think it would make a significant difference to me whether they added swimming or not. If I had to choose between those two I'd probably choose to keep original system intact, just to keep the game closer to original and see all the newfags whine about it.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

As Ash said the game is clearly designed around water=instant death. It’s basically the only way to die below five or six star wanted level. To add swimming in a non-tedium-inducing way would require a massive amount of additional content/design, and Rockstar obviously isn’t going to do that, and even if they did they would probably fuck it up based on their recent track record.

“Don’t fix what isn’t broken” is a lesson pretty much every modern “remaster” should (and fails) to take to heart.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

If Rockstar wanted to do something interesting they'd remake GTA2. Anywhere City and its retro-futurism sci-fi world is easily the coolest GTA has ever been aesthetically.

Dude that looks awesome! But how come it's so inconsistent to the box cover art and the intro movie?

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

I don't think VC's lack of swimming added any meaningful difficulty. There's probably only a handful of parts in the game where falling in the water as a hazard as part of a route on a mission doesn't feel cheap or unfair. The majority of your deaths to the water in VC and GTA3 is when you're making clunky precarious jumps between a dock and a boat floating alongside and you fall between the two, it's just a waste of time if anything.

Lol GTA3 and VC were too hard, plz add game journalist mode. Git gud scrub.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

If Rockstar wanted to do something interesting they'd remake GTA2. Anywhere City and its retro-futurism sci-fi world is easily the coolest GTA has ever been aesthetically.

Dude that looks awesome! But how come it's so inconsistent to the box cover art and the intro movie?

My guess with the intro (and short film the intro is made from) is it was just cheaper. You do that live-action intro looking like the art and the CGI advertising material and now you aren't using footage of actual cars in New York, you're making miniatures for the city and retro fantasy cars, you're making prop guns, and you're probably making some costumes.

I do wonder if they were making a CGI intro at one point. That bit with the main character being chased by the police with stolen Zaibatsu Corporation boxes is also in the short film; (but I don't think it's in the intro) it's nowhere near as big (there's no exploding cars) but the short film does have a shot of Claude in the car with Z boxes next to him like this.

 

[AW8]

My favorite thing about 3's mission design is that they hadn't yet scripted all the emergent fun out of them. Like in the mission where you're supposed to throw a molotov in a window and then a car pops out of a garage and you're supposed to chase after it, I just grabbed a bus and parked it in front of the garage so the guy couldn't get out and killed him without a chase. Or that annoying mission near the end where it expects you to shoot a plane down with a rocket on a rickety boat, I just drove to the airport and blew it up as it came in for a landing.

Last time I played GTA 3, I attempted some outside the box thinking with the mission "Bait". Three death squad cars have been tasked to kill the player, so you're supposed to lead them into an ambush where the Yakuza will kill them for you.
"But wait", I thought, "why don't I just kill them myself?" So I slowly approached the first death squad car out of aggro range, and then fired my rocket launcher at it and watched it go up in a fireball.

"MISSION FAILED - You failed to lead the cars to the ambush!" Except that was never demanded in the plot, the Yakuza guys merely offered to help you out. The only one demanding the death squads to be escorted unharmed to a specific spot was the mission designer. So while most missions were pretty free in GTA 3, there were unfortunate signs of what was to come even here.

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

To some very small extent you're correct (..)

If that's true, that's not so bad. I don't think to keep butting heads about the subject is going to be very interesting. In any case, the "shallowness" which I impute to GTA's design is not mark of inferiority. Games are an illusion and for me the the value of a game is ultimately how far that illusion is able to carry the player. You stop playing the game when the spell is gone, regardless of the game's depth.

When I think back to how playing GTA 3 in a brand new PS2 was back in 2002, I still pause a bit in wonder. It's rather facile to look back with a critic's eye and point out all the shortcomings of the missions, but I didn't care much about that at the time. Nor did many people (I remember comedian Bill Burr talking about how addicted he got to the game to the point he had to hide away his console). Completing the missions gave you the sense of advancing in the world and it was the game's world with all its interconnected elements that pulled you in like nothing else. It was kind of how you imagined games in the future to be like (what Cyberpunk tried to be and failed). There wasn't a mountain of open-world games to choose from and we weren't all so old and cynical.

 

[Ash]

Spells and illusions? Why not play for the game objectives, rules, interactions, challenges, engagement...somewhere down the line gameplay started being secondary to immersion, atmosphere, story, realism, graphics. Fucking faggots ruining everything.

GTA3 was never particularly impressive. People act like 3D open world hadn't been done before GTA3. It hadn't...for them.
It was OK. Wasn't until Vice City and San Andreas that it started to stand out as potential classics. Then they threw it all away. Reminds me of Bethesda with Morrowind and all the potential there, only to turn into Oblivion and Skyrim. Widespread tragic decline in this shit industry.

 

[Gilius Thunderhead]

You only play the game if you're able to suspend disbelief that you're watching more than some pixels on a screen. Depth is a way to achieve it, but it too eventually runs its course. Some games manage the same effect without any substantial gameplay depth. Or are you going to tell me shooting radscorpions in Fallout is deep?

If you want pure intellectual challenge/engagement, I suggest you take up chess. Or maybe become an engineer or rocket scientist. Certainly a better use of your time than assigning skill points to your character in some nerd fantasy world.

 

[Ash]

FFS

What a

and

enabler

 

[Comte]

I posted it before and I'll post here again, this site contains modpacks for GTA3, VC, SA, 4, Bully, Manhunt, the Warriors and packs of Chinatown wars, VCS, and LCS with emulator included. Might be worth downloading everything and saving somewhere before Take-Two comes after them, as well.
https://www.definitive-edition-project.com/files

It might also be a good idea to download copies of these games as well, because you can bet your ass all of them will disappear from Steam when their respective remasters come out.

Do these packs bring back music that was removed?