I think 4 runs decently now though? I have it installed on Steam Deck and that seems to handle 60fps well. I have only played around an hour of it, as I didn’t feel in the mood for that type of game then.
Comment on Let's discuss: Grand Theft Auto
misk@sopuli.xyz 5 days ago
I didn’t think that gimmicky game where you run over lines of people (monks? cadets?) would become that popular. Never figured what they were exactly but it was fun. Quest system was a dealbreaker for me. I didn’t know English that well and timed missions suck.
- I skipped 2 based on experience with the first. I think I missed more colourful lighting but not much more than that.
- Couldn’t ignore 3 which was technically impressive but was kind of boring otherwise. Played it to kill time but Tony Hawk was still better at that.
- 4 ran like shit but the story kept me playing. This thing needs a proper remaster to evaluate.
- 5 was an all around achievement and a landmark in a video game history. It’s probably the closest thing to a modern Blizzard game - not exactly innovative but really polished and treated reasonably well for years.
Never touched a game with predatory monetisation so I never touched multiplayer. Heard it sucks but somehow it’s making a bank.
knokelmaat@beehaw.org 4 days ago
misk@sopuli.xyz 4 days ago
According to pcgamingwiki it has frame pacing and stutter issues even on high end systems. I’m okay with how it runs on current PCs and Xbox Series X but that’s because I can stomach 40 fps with inconsistent frame pacing - many people can’t and at this point it’s probably best to hope for some updated version.
CrateDane@feddit.dk 4 days ago
Hare Krishna monks, AFAIK. 2 was indeed largely the first game with improved lighting. Was still pretty great for the time.