|
When a game bursts onto the scene as, erm, violently as Grand Theft
Auto 3 did last year, you leave people chomping at the bit waiting
for a sequel. Some of you have been chomping at the bit so much,
that there isn't any bit left. Not even a bit of bit. So, when it
came time for the game to be released everyone here at Netjak had a
review ready, or wanted to get one ready. Except me.
I figured I'd avoid playing the game because everyone would have
written about it. But then Search & I figured that it'd probably be
best to let everyone weigh in on the game who had an opinion. So
here it is...Netjak's Colossal Dive into Debauchery and Vice.
Our round table of reviewers consists of a fairly diverse group of
people, covering both genders and a fairly wide age gap. Some of the
people participating are married and have kids. While we understand
that every gamer of every age is probably really looking forward to
this, you might wanna make sure you know what your elementary school
kid is getting into before letting them just go throw themselves
headlong into this game.
The ESRB put an "M" rating on this game for a reason. The reason
probably has to do something with the fact that the game is named
"Vice City", and that the central plot revolves around someone
stealing the cocaine and cash you were scheduled to deliver, and
you, Tommy Vercetti, having to go and get it back. Other than that,
wholesome family fun time! For the most part, the plot isn't really
there, say most of the reviewers, it's around enough to guide you
through the game, but not there so much as it would be in an RPG, or
even in the game as much as it was in GTA3.
So, to start the discussion off, I asked for everyone's first
impressions of the game. I was curious to see if GTA: VC would have
the same impact as GTA3 did. Most of the reviewers had good things
to say about the game right off. Search loved the 80s flashback feel
of the game, saying it reminded him of simpler times, days of
mullets and Miami Vice. Laughing Target wasn't as positive, saying
it didn't really feel too much different from GTA3 and the controls
felt too "loose" for his liking. But Xeno, Blue, and the rest of the
discussion agreed that the game felt fun right from the get go aside
from some minor quirks, and had a good first impression of the game
from the beginning.
Any time you can impress some of the toughest critics around from
the get go, you've released a pretty good product. Since LT had
mentioned the issue of controls, I asked about them next. Netnut
says that they feel jerky, and LT agrees, especially in the parts of
the game where you're on foot. LT seems to have a big problem with
lining your character up to go up the stairs. The rest of the staff
is divided, with Xeno not really having any issues with
the controls. Xeno does say that controlling the boats totally
sucks, a point which everyone heartily agreed upon, especially given
the fact that you have to race other boats in parts of the game.
Everyone also agrees that controlling the bikes is tough, and there
are increased amounts of spinouts, most notably in the rain. So,
kind of a mixed bag.
Half of us seem to think that controls are fine, the other half say
that they have issues with them. Well, if the controls weren't dead
on, what then, about the engine? Did the game's core still feel
solid? If the graphics looked nice but the game moved at 2 frames a
second, it wouldn't be an improvement. Xeno started by saying that
load times were a lot smaller, and loads didn't happen as often as
they did in GTA3. (I have to keep fighting the urge to say "the
original". There were actually a bunch of GTA games for the PC, and
they weren't all that good until GTA3.) LT, and Search both agreed,
but Search added that the engine felt like it was trying to do too
much, and it showed.
After this, everyone agreed that the game didn't feel as fluid as
GTA3 did, and in addition, had bad things to say about the sun
getting in your eyes. LT said that you'd notice that the levels
weren't as good graphically because they were so much larger. Netnut
disagrees slightly, saying that he likes the new brighter looking,
more colorful Vice City, but still adds that it is more difficult to
see things than before. One of the things that made that last
version of GTA so good was the radio stations, and the variety of
music you got.
In GTA: VC, Search66 probably said it best, GTA: VC only serves to
separate itself further from the rest of the game world in terms of
game music. Everyone loved the selection of music, although some of
them didn't like certain stations. (Which is understandable...I'm
not going to listen to every genre of music.) Not surprisingly,
everyone agreed that the CD compilations that the GTA folks released
of the game's music were lame. I have to agree. I think 1 video game
souundtrack is pushing it sometimes, but 6 different CDs?! Your
game's good...but it's not going to affect all aspects of my life so
thoroughly that I need to have it with me wherever I go. But,
strictly within the context of the game alone, if you liked the
music in GTA3, you're only going to like the fact that they used the
original artists in GTA: VC more.
 Speaking of audio...and speaking...how 'bout them voice actors? Ray
Liotta pulls off something in GTA: VC that he hasn't been able to do
in any of his latest movie outings...be cool. A unanimous thumbs-up
across the board for ol' Ray. Maybe he should consider a career
change. Netnut also likes the new lines of random dialogue the
passersby are given. Search66 has minor issues with the porn stars
not shutting up. Lee Majors voicing for Mitch Baker is pretty good,
says everyone involved, and Netnut also notes that the mouth
movement actually matches the words in the game, and all in all is
very impressed with the way this aspect of the game worked out.
Time to check out the "Auto" aspects of Grand Theft Auto. As you
probably know by now they've added motorcycles into the game, but
did they have to take out a bunch of other cars to do it? Xeno says
no, and that she likes the wider variety of cars. LT says that it
seems like there are less car types in the game, but this could be
attributed to his hatred of the cars of the 80s. Search, ever the
80s junkie, likes the selection of cars, as does Netnut, especially
the golf carts and mopeds. Xeno says they have expanded the number
of freelance missions, adding that you can now drive around
delivering pizza among other things. If you thought Liberty City was
a tough place to make your mark in, you're probably going to find
Vice City a bit tougher.
The missions central to the plot seem to be a bit easier in the eyes
of our staff, but that could be due to the fact that they're
accustomed to the engine now, and have been through the same type of
thing from the last GTA. However, everyone agrees that with the
faster cop cars, that trying to go out on the street and "freelance"
is more difficult than it was in GTA3. One of the things that the
GTA series has always done right is the little things...humor in the
missions, etc. Little things that bring you joy because it shows
that the game developers care. LT doesn't like the way that the
passersby will crowd around a dead body...while he's still running
around with his Uzi. Netnut thinks that the game limiting you to
only making cash by advancing the story limits the game's
flexibility, but aside from that, everyone had good things to say
about the little touches, mainly commenting on how the humor on the
radio stations was as good as before, if not better. Xeno notes that
there are more jumps, Netnut likes the ability to purchase property,
and likes the new improvised weapons in the game. Nothing like a
chainsaw to liven up a sequel.
 So, how does Vice City fare in the shadow of its older brother?
Well, every reviewer except one said that the game didn't quite
match up with the original, with Netnut being the only exception. As
a game on it's own, it stands out well, getting very high marks, but
nearly everyone else felt like the "surprise value" wasn't there
from the last incarnation of the game. You came in knowing what to
expect, and it didn't thrill you as much. Well, there you have
it...5 different opinions combined into one mainly positive review
all around. Nearly everyone here likes the game...and is still
playing it. Xeno notes that it's taken her just about 50 hours to go
through the game. That, my friends, is what they call value. You
rent a game that you can beat in 6 hours. You buy one that holds
your attention for more than 50.
Hopefully, more designers will start to learn that lesson. A total
of 5 thumbs up from the gang here at Netjak. If that's not
enough of a reason to get this game now, then you either don't like
games, or are probably still too young and impressionable to play
it. Come back when you're older. =)
|
