This game is not that great at all...

[Horus]

Most of the missions are made on a "try again until you get it right" basis, meaning they REQUIRE you to try them multiple times until you can get the mission right. But on the first try? Some are doable, most are not.

I don't see what the fuss is about.

[Gunslinger1127]

I almost finished the game.. I would of finished it if i wasnt 100k short from finishing the last mission so i was like ♥♥♥♥ this and gaved up. /facepalm/ (I dont like using cheats)

[death]

True, the game is hard, maybe do a easier GTA like GTA San Andreas or GTA 5 or something.

[Horus]

It's not "HARD".

It's stupid. As in, you have to KNOW how the mission unfolds BEFORE you can achieve it, many times.

It's stupid. As in, you have to drive to the person giving you the mission, then drive to the mission, then fail it at LEAST once, and then reload and do it ALL again, because you can't save right before the mission proper.

It's stupid. It's a bad design, made so as to waste as much of your time as possible so as to stretch the meager content.

No, really, it isn't HARD. It's badly designed, or what is often called "fake difficulty".

[xSOSxHawkens]

Originally posted by Horus:

It's not "HARD".

It's stupid. As in, you have to KNOW how the mission unfolds BEFORE you can achieve it, many times.

It's stupid. As in, you have to drive to the person giving you the mission, then drive to the mission, then fail it at LEAST once, and then reload and do it ALL again, because you can't save right before the mission proper.

It's stupid. It's a bad design, made so as to waste as much of your time as possible so as to stretch the meager content.

No, really, it isn't HARD. It's badly designed, or what is often called "fake difficulty".

Its from an era of gaming where this was the NORM and was not seem in nearly the same bad light as it is now.

Previous GTA titles had been top down 2d games. Think about the "depth" of any 2d topdown you have ever played. Even the beast are nowhere near the Depth of a modern game in terms of cannon OR gameplay/mission design.

Compared to previous games of its franchise, and of competitors of its time GTA-3 had decent missions, with a decent storyline, all in what at the time was a cutting edge and insanely huge 3d world with free movment.

Those things, esecialy in such a large scale enviroment AND 3d were ground breaking advancements for the franchise, and large steps in the general history of games and a whole.

When comapred to the streamlined, scripted, and directed works of art that modern games (both good and bad) have become, GTA-3 can indeed seem dull, simple, and tedious. But that is like comparing and old washing machine from 1900 to a new one today. One is obviously better, but trying to compare them is no longer fair becuase of the age differnece. The old washer was the best or one of the top of its time, and as such is still more than capable now, if only a bit dated in how it works.

[Horus]

Originally posted by xSOSxHawkens:

Its from an era of gaming where this was the NORM and was not seem in nearly the same bad light as it is now.

Previous GTA titles had been top down 2d games. Think about the "depth" of any 2d topdown you have ever played. Even the beast are nowhere near the Depth of a modern game in terms of cannon OR gameplay/mission design.

Compared to previous games of its franchise, and of competitors of its time GTA-3 had decent missions, with a decent storyline, all in what at the time was a cutting edge and insanely huge 3d world with free movment.

Those things, esecialy in such a large scale enviroment AND 3d were ground breaking advancements for the franchise, and large steps in the general history of games and a whole.

When comapred to the streamlined, scripted, and directed works of art that modern games (both good and bad) have become, GTA-3 can indeed seem dull, simple, and tedious. But that is like comparing and old washing machine from 1900 to a new one today. One is obviously better, but trying to compare them is no longer fair becuase of the age differnece. The old washer was the best or one of the top of its time, and as such is still more than capable now, if only a bit dated in how it works.

I have been gaming on home systems for over 30 years. I have seen good and bad designs, and this is a bad one.

However, I must say, you make a very valid point where one can imagine the glee of players just driving around, exploring, and messing with the cars/people/cops, etc. Which is something that is completely lacking when playing it over 10 years after release. You make a very valid point, sir.

It's not Half-Life 1, but that element you speak of, does make up for some of the currently perceived shortcomings. What I describe as "wasting my time driving around" was then "gleefully wreaking havoc in the virtual world of Liberty City"... Point taken.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Thanks!

I can agree though, compared to modern titles this leaves allot to look for.

I got into GTA with Vice City, played SA and IV, alsong with the Saints Row series.

I picked up 3 in the bundle durring summer, and have had a good chunk of time while I am at the hospital with my mom (sadly she is passing) to play older games on my laptop.

I have been trying hard to get into GTA-III, but its lack of any real narritive or story so far is making it hard to get imersed in. I feel like they just start you as a generic charcter then give you missions with little understanding of why you are doing them beyond the one or two sentances the guy out the back door barks at you.

Compared to the narritive in Vice City as it starts, or any other modern GTA, there is almost no story lol.

[Love]

Originally posted by Horus:

I don't see what the fuss is about.

You'd have to be a gamer gaming in 2001 to understand the "fuss". That is not to say it's not a great game to this day, just saying that the impact of it was greater experienced when this was the best of what GTA (and open-world games in general) had to offer. No Vice City at this point, definitely no San Andreas, no Saint's Row, no Watch Dogs, No Skyrim, No Fallout 3/NV- just GTA III. It was taking the game from it's top-down perspective to a full on 3d world, among other achievments.

There were some games dabbling with the 3d space, but this is one of the first (at least on consoles) to feature a full living space where you could do what you wanted. Go in and do missions, or just run around and explore, or cause mayhem.

It sucks you don't personally get to expereince the "fuss", but surely you can understand/appreciate why it is just as important to 3d gaming as Super Mario 64 was.

[Horus]

Originally posted by ☥Imi-ib☥:

Originally posted by Horus:

I don't see what the fuss is about.

You'd have to be a gamer gaming in 2001 to understand the "fuss". That is not to say it's not a great game to this day, just saying that the impact of it was greater experienced when this was the best of what GTA (and open-world games in general) had to offer. No Vice City at this point, definitely no San Andreas, no Saint's Row, no Watch Dogs, No Skyrim, No Fallout 3/NV- just GTA III. It was taking the game from it's top-down perspective to a full on 3d world, among other achievments.

There were some games dabbling with the 3d space, but this is one of the first (at least on consoles) to feature a full living space where you could do what you wanted. Go in and do missions, or just run around and explore, or cause mayhem.

It sucks you don't personally get to expereince the "fuss", but surely you can understand/appreciate why it is just as important to 3d gaming as Super Mario 64 was.

Well, yes, since I've likely been playing games since before you were born...

Which is the reason why I don't have much fun with 2D games... I've had my fill back when that's all there was.

[76561198051514398]

Yeah, the games not great. Same with vice city. GTA san andreas is boner inducing though.

[Carne Padre]

its like u guys never owned a Ps2 and played this

[xSOSxHawkens]

Originally posted by I'm A POKEMON:

its like u guys never owned a Ps2 and played this

I didnt, owned a PS1, a PS3 and regularly play on a PS4, but never the ps2 lol.

But I can still apreciate it for what it was, even if its a bit lower by modern standards. For me the only real thing keeping me from going back is the lack of narrative, the whole story seems so slim with little building of the charecter.

I started GTA on PC @ San Adreas after playing some Vice City over at a friends. Did GTA 4, and the Saints Rows, and then tried out Vice and Three. Out of those two, GTA-3 is basicaly the spotlight on Tech, relying more on how advanced it was at the time and less on building an enviroment.

The tech advances in Vice City were slim compared to 3, and they had to work to give a better and more griping soty to keep you in the world, no longer being able to rely on fancy graphics as much.

In SA you get both. Rockstar by then had figure out story scripting and story telling. They created a believable enviroment, with suspensfull and charecterbuilding plot twists.

IMHO, GTA-4 fell back to the GTA-3 ideals. It was more tech advance and less story. I personaly found the story line more griping and suspensfull in GTA-SA and feel that in GTA-4 they were repetitive and dull, with far less "charecter" to the charecters. Overall I found the plot in 4 to be flat. It had a few high points, but compared to SA I found it boreing or tedious more than often than not.

I cannot comment on GTA-5, have to wait till I can aford to upgrade my CPU to e PhenomII x6, as atm I run on only a lonely athlon 64x2 6000+ :/

[kasenoto]

Originally posted by I'm A POKEMON:

its like u guys never owned a Ps2 and played this

Right.

This game was baller as hell, and was fun. I played GTA III after I played GTA SA and I still got hooked onto it. I love this game a lot.

[Powellinho.72]

the game is still awesome and i enjoyed every minute of it , im actually gonna buy it again at some point , i miss it alot !

[Powellinho.72]

Yeah , still love this game , but it hasnt aged very well . Missions in this game are so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on times its just not enjoyable . Some of them .

[SickFox]

First and most importantly, no one give a ♥♥♥♥ what you think. Got a problem? Write a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ review. You obviously just wanted to stir up the fans and talk ♥♥♥♥. Second, you are an idiot thinking you could judge a game this old by current standards. Want to undestand the hype? You never will. You missed it. Too late. So go ♥♥♥♥ yourself and you ignorant "opinion". GTA III is a classic. Not in the sense that it was the best but it was revolutionary for its time. You would not have GTA V or whatever the ♥♥♥♥ your dumb ass thinks was the "best" GTA without the invented core mechanics of GTA III. I started on GTA 2 when it came out. Played GTA III when it was new. It is still a good game like it or not.