安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
There are tawo possibilities
They played latter GTA games before trying GTA3 and din't like it cause muh outdated graphics
or
Like me they were annoyed by the fact that other than the 2nd island you barely have any safe space to mind your business after becoming enemy of city gangs
Vice City was crap, at first I was like "ok maybe more roads will open" then after cheating my way through Downtown as I like "did they really make me waste 28€ for 10 roads and a town filled with nothing?", maybe they wasted tons of money licensing songs, maybe not but gameplay and replayability wise it was far worse than GTA3.
I'd say Vice City Stories or Liberty City Stories.
III was revolutionary and excellent but has not aged as well as the others.
At one time, I would have probably chosen GTA4 as the worst, due to sluggish vehicle handling, wonky cover and combat, dreadful optimization and an insistence on forcing the player to fraternize and date characters we don't care about instead of shooting cops and running over old ladies.
However, since the time I first played it circa 2011, my stance on that has changed. Now, without hesitation, I definitely consider GTA5 to be the worst of the 3D games (because it's kind of cheating to count the crappy, old, top-down ones).
For starters, having three playable characters was a terrible idea. It's clear R* got the idea from the weaving stories that were part of GTA4 and EFLC. They just forgot an important element was that each character was the lone protagonist for their respective stories.
When you have to keep track of three different characters' money, weapons, ammo, skills and all that, it's just left me feeling apathetic to all of them. It's also disappointing that each character can only purchase certain kinds of clothes, hairstyles and tattoos they can purchase, so I never really felt like I had full control over their customization.
Not only that, but the protagonists suck, too. Franklin is, as Ryder would probably say, "a ♥♥♥♥♥-ass busta" who always moaning, Michael is just an impotent idiot, and Trevor, while being easily the most fun to play as, is also, in my opinion, just to cartoonishly evil to be enjoyed.
And the worst part of the characters, to me, was that YOU COULDN'T GROW THEM. Michael starts off with a damn mansion, Franklin is given a car for free and a Vinewood Hills mansion for doing a mission and Trevor seems perfectly at home in his crappy trailer. Niko didn't get to choose his safehouses either, but he was still rising up the ladder and the quality progressed. And sure, maybe the "rising underworld muscle who becomes the biggest thug in the playable area is a pretty cliche story trope for the crime sandbox genre, but you know why it works? Because it's the perfect plot to show player progress.
I could also go on to talk about how the story was an incoherent mess of non-paying and unrewarded story missions, or how the side characters were all irritating or how they took all the fun out of the ragdoll physics and made the car handling unchallenging, or how the weapons were too accurate easy and wasn't as visceral as Max Payne 3, or how the NPCs are even less engaging than in San Andreas or how the map is an absolute (but well-made) catastrophe, or how they added stupid crap like a stock market no one used, or how cancerous, predatory and mind-numblingly awful the multiplayer side has been with terrible vehicles and missions added ... but I'm too tired to get into any of it.
So instead, I leave you with the knowledge that San Andreas, a game from 2004 - while perhaps not physically bigger - was so much bigger in scope and scale. You always had other places to travel to. Big cities, small towns, forlorn deserts and big forests. In GTA5, if you leave Los Santos, the only place you really have to go is right back to Los Santos, because there's not a lot of gameplay to find in Paletto Bay and all of the story, landmarks and interesting stuff is in LS. And hey, despite being bigger, it takes longer to get from one end of the map to the other in SA
On a final note, to 5's credit, I have to say that RAGE is probably the best modern game engine imo, as it allows an insane amount of impressive details. Also, I enjoyed having minigames like golf and darts available in multiplayer. Minigames were one of the worst parts of 4 because it was single player and keeping the player away from the actual GTA game - in multiplayer it works because you're socializing with real people you care about AND it keeps you from the terrible actual GTA game.
In this sense: no game. (was ''bad'')
Undeniably the worst missions in the series, an awful camera that sometimes blocks your reticle, the most annoying characters (Catalina, B-Dup), a giant empty map that is more frustrating than fun to explore, a bullet-sponge boss, terrible side quests involving RC cars and trucks, horribly implemtned qte games, boring races, outdated engine/physics, garbage RPG elements that forces you to repeadtedly dive underwater to pad your "lung meter" to progress the game, cheap looking & sounding special effects (the UZI sounds like a stapler) etc., etc.
It's a mess. Screw that game.