Mordecai Walfish wrote on Nov 14, 2012, 14:11:I really enjoyed GTA; I was a little put off by GTAII but it was actually pretty decent; GTA3 was terrible; Vice City was excellent (if a bit graphically dated); San Andreas was even more graphically dated and added irritating new macro-management elements and the theme was terrible; GTAIV had a good theme but was very poorly executed. So GTA has always been a series that had more potential than was ever realised - it was only with Vice City that I thought they struck the balance right.
Again, the evidence is in the history of this franchise and rockstar's handling of it. Look at the last 2D GTA titles. They had TONS more stuff to do than GTA3 did. It's very much like Intel's strategy (Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock) The "Tick" in this case, was GTA3.. a new engine, new hurdles to overcome with it to fully take advantage of it. "Tock" was Vice City/San Andreas, where you can see they really made the most of what they had. With GTAIV we entered another "Tick" phase.. meaning shiny new engine.. but not as much to do as before. GTAV is a "Tock" phase, meaning they have experience under their belt with this new engine, they know how to present it in new ways and develop more engrossing gameplay with it, just as they did with Vice City/San Andreas.
How can you say you've seen no new gameplay elements since GTAIV with whats been unveiled about GTAV?