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 10 months 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 10 months ago
misk@sopuli.xyz 10 months 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 10 months ago
Hare Krishna monks, AFAIK. 2 was indeed largely the first game with improved lighting. Was still pretty great for the time.