GTA V should have scored an 8

  • 94 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by joel_c17 (2829 posts) -

GTA V single played received a 9 while the online scored a 7 - why does this game get the luxury of having the online and single player reviewed separately? Dont get me wrong - i loved the game but i find it unfair that it gets special treatment because of the way it was released whereas every other game gets reviewed as a package.

What are your thoughts?

#2 Posted by mems_1224 (46557 posts) -

cry more

#4 Edited by KHAndAnime (13441 posts) -

It gets special treatment because Rockstar paid Gamespot money.

#5 Edited by Bigboi500 (29347 posts) -

Learn that scores don't mean anything.

#6 Posted by anab0lic (271 posts) -

based on the single player alone id score it a 5-6.

Utterly horrible controls, dull mind numbingly easy combat, story and chars i didnt really care for, the worst music of any gta game and should have been released on next gen consoles as visually it looks and runs terrible at times.

#7 Edited by SteXmaN (373 posts) -

#8 Edited by charizard1605 (56054 posts) -

I agree

#9 Posted by PhazonBlazer (11612 posts) -

Nope, the games awesome. Get over it.

#10 Posted by charizard1605 (56054 posts) -
#11 Posted by TheEroica (13313 posts) -

I think it should get to keep the perfect 16.

#12 Edited by metaknight36 (456 posts) -
#13 Posted by Doolz2024 (9604 posts) -

It was reviewed separately because GTA Online is not GTAV multiplayer. It's its own thing. GTAV is strictly a single player experience and was rightfully reviewed as such.

#14 Edited by uninspiredcup (7855 posts) -

Arma 3 got scored down for lacking launch content. Apparently this law does not apply to highly hyped money spinners.

#15 Posted by TheEroica (13313 posts) -
#16 Posted by charizard1605 (56054 posts) -

Arma 3 got scored down for lacking launch content. Apparently this law does not apply to highly hyped money spinners.

I can't believe it, but uninspiredcup is actually making a good point here.

#17 Posted by joel_c17 (2829 posts) -

It was reviewed separately because GTA Online is not GTAV multiplayer. It's its own thing. GTAV is strictly a single player experience and was rightfully reviewed as such.

Oh great ill go just out and buy GTA Online separately - oh and i cant because its a part of GTAV. Great logic use there...

#18 Edited by SteXmaN (373 posts) -
@uninspiredcup said:

Arma 3 got scored down for lacking launch content. Apparently this law does not apply to highly hyped money spinners.

GTAV SP is 30h+ long experience so it hardly lacked content :P

charizard1605 he actually didn't.

joel_c17

#19 Posted by foxhound_fox (87697 posts) -

Welcome to the new Gamespot. In a few months, another reviewer might come along and give it a 4/10, or a 10/10.

#20 Posted by ShepardCommandr (2419 posts) -

No it should have scored a 10.

#21 Posted by princeofshapeir (13765 posts) -

You have a point, OP. As we all know the online portion of the game released on the same day as single player, and is not at all separate from the single player game.

#22 Edited by ManInFlames-77 (291 posts) -

Nope. It deserves a 97, just like its Metascore :)

#23 Posted by Krelian-co (10374 posts) -
#24 Posted by kipsta77 (943 posts) -

Because GTA Online =/= GTA V.

They are completely separate games, Rockstar made this clear.

#25 Posted by sukraj (22133 posts) -

GTA V is such a sweet game.

#26 Posted by Netret0120 (2033 posts) -

Does this really bother you?

Like seriously? It is a personal opinion of Petit and many of her issues will go away with time eg: Lost characters.

If it really bothers you that much you can simply not buy the game. Odds are you probably bought it anyway.

#27 Edited by bezza2011 (2384 posts) -

I feel as tho GTA V should of been marked down, really. I mean The Heists??? What Heists I did one which meant anything the rest were for nothing at all and the last one you didn't have to do anything except walk, all that about using the same people because they leveling up meant nothing because you only used them 1 more time after the original heist.

As much as i love tennis, golf, triathlons, i'm afraid i couldn't care less, it's meant to be GRAND THEFT AUTO, not Grand Lets Go Play Golf Auto, were meant to be master thieves, let's but stuff in the game where i can be a master thief, lets rob houses like you could in GTA: San Andreas if anyone can remember, lets be able to go into the bookies, let us rob banks on the whim, let us rob shops, let us be the big dealer in Los Santos, let us do drug runs properly, mini games where we drop off at certain places, let us in buildings!!!

But nope once the main game is over the only way to make money is buy shops, and play the stock market the problem is with the stockmarket nothing really moves that much to make money and it's complete guess work because there isn't any hints to what will be going up or down or nothing.

It's ok they tho you killing everyone having a laugh, you can't rob no where properly but don't worry you can go bike riding. and have a game of tennis or golf lol.

Online is where it's at that game there is what should be in the main game after you finish the main story. Online is brilliant best online game i've played for ages, forget the misshaps it's ok now,

#28 Posted by jhonMalcovich (4525 posts) -
#29 Posted by drinkerofjuice (3169 posts) -

Should have gotten an 8.765672134513563 out of 10, or something just as meaningless.

#30 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150350 posts) -

Why does score matter? It's an arbitrary number thought by someone tasked with writing a review. It means nothing. The only thing important is the quality of the game. Is it well made? Does the genre appeal to you? Have at it.....

#31 Posted by _Matt_ (8868 posts) -

It got special treatment because of the hype simply. GTA Online is still GTA V, you cannot buy one without the other therefore it is the same game. Other games such as Arma III and Gran Turismo 5 have been docked for not having all online features there day 1, GTA V should be no different.

#32 Edited by The_Last_Ride (70684 posts) -

Well it seems gamespot is now rating the singleplayer and mutliplayer seperately. They should rate every game this way or else it would seem GTA V gets an "unfair" review

#33 Edited by uninspiredcup (7855 posts) -

@kipsta77 said:

Because GTA Online =/= GTA V.

They are completely separate games, Rockstar made this clear.

Orange Box had completely separate games.

Also this is obv bullshit. It's a multiplayer component, many games have it, all games gets reviews by it, this is no exception "just because".

#34 Edited by Cranler (8730 posts) -
#35 Posted by Cranler (8730 posts) -

@_Matt_ said:

It got special treatment because of the hype simply. GTA Online is still GTA V, you cannot buy one without the other therefore it is the same game. Other games such as Arma III and Gran Turismo 5 have been docked for not having all online features there day 1, GTA V should be no different.

Isnt ARMA 3 mp only at launch with sp episodes being released later?

Anyways, what if Far Cry 3 and Tombraider reboot for example had separate reviews for their lackuster mp? FC 3 is a 9 for sp imo but a 6 at best for mp.

#36 Edited by biggest_loser (24029 posts) -

@joel_c17: It deserved a 6 because of its superficial missions and weak writing. Some of the review comments I've read on Wikipedia are goddamn laughable. One of the reviews was saying how much meticulous planning the heists require. You mean looking at a board and choosing A or B sonny? Another review must have said that you can be tactical with the positioning of the three characters. Did they play a different game or something? Thank god there are smart people on this board who aren't blinded by this game.

#37 Edited by AcidThunder (2332 posts) -

Only in your fantasies.

#38 Posted by Ninja-Hippo (23426 posts) -

GTA Online is more a free(ish) to play online game funded by microtransactions than a multiplayer component to GTA 5.

#39 Posted by tenaka2 (17019 posts) -

Console games are allowed to score high regardless of frames rates dropping to 10fps and game stopping bugs. Console standards are dropping.

#40 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

GTA Online is a free add-on to GTAV. Why would I change my view of GTAV because of a free add-on?

#41 Posted by Liquid_ (2441 posts) -

Nope, the games awesome. Get over it.

it's pretty bad actually.

#42 Posted by uninspiredcup (7855 posts) -

GTA Online is a free add-on to GTAV. Why would I change my view of GTAV because of a free add-on?

It's not an addon. It wasn't ready at launch.
Honestly, the spin you guys try to put on this shit.

#43 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (6986 posts) -

GTA Online is more a free(ish) to play online game funded by microtransactions than a multiplayer component to GTA 5.

Sweet. Where can I download it?

#44 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38214 posts) -

Because R* are smart and released the Online after so its mediocrity wouldnt bring down the score of the core main game

#45 Posted by lundy86_4 (43010 posts) -

They were released at different times. Why would you review them together? That would have put them way behind on their GTAV review release.

#46 Edited by Cranler (8730 posts) -

@joel_c17: It deserved a 6 because of its superficial missions and weak writing. Some of the review comments I've read on Wikipedia are goddamn laughable. One of the reviews was saying how much meticulous planning the heists require. You mean looking at a board and choosing A or B sonny? Another review must have said that you can be tactical with the positioning of the three characters. Did they play a different game or something? Thank god there are smart people on this board who aren't blinded by this game.

You do know that a 6 is a below average score right? Its not a book and its not Payday either. GTA V has flaws but so do all games. GTA V is far better than recent games that have been score highly like Bioshock Infinite, FC 3, Metro Last light etc. Also remember that GTA V is the best in its genre, it destroys JC 2, Sleeping Dogs and SR 4.

The reviewers that give the game a 0 come up with all kinds of bad reasons. Comparing graphics to linear games. Saying the ai sucks when it's the best of the genre by far. One reviewer even said that the radial menu makes weapon and station changes much harder when in reality it makes it much quicker and easier.

Heres a review where the game was given a 1

"This game is generally good but I hate the fact that all women are walking around with 10 lbs of cleavage on their pencil thin bodies. Most of the time the game is great."

Another review that scored it a 1

"Very dumbed down car handling. It is pathetic and I bet that was made for all that casual players that dont know nothing about real world physics etc. So that kids can have fun in stupid games but when they grow up they are making car accidents because they have no idea about real car handling. I only hope that good moders will fix that pathetic childish car handling on PC version. Also add speedometer, fuel usage and stuff that will make this game more real so it will not look so much dumbed down"

This review gave the game a 0

"Poor framerate, poor graphics. Shouldnt have been released for this gen consoles. I would have loved to see this on my PC instead. It could have been so beautiful, but instead they sold out."

#47 Edited by Cranler (8730 posts) -

@seanmcloughlin said:

Because R* are smart and released the Online after so its mediocrity wouldnt bring down the score of the core main game

So sp alone is worth a good score but giving the buyer a whole other mode should hurt the score? Nice logic!

Name me some games that have great mp and sp in one package. Most games that have a solid sp , have a weak mp(and vice versa). Any reviewer with half a brain takes this into consideration when scoring.

Otherwise games like TLOU, Tombraider, FC 3 would have much lower scores.

#48 Posted by Lalucar (296 posts) -

Whether other games have or have not been reviewed like this in the past, doesn't it make more sense to do it this way? I mean if you are anything like me and couldn't care less about the online features of GTA V, a score only reflecting the story is going to be more helpful when deciding to buy the game. I think more big releases should be handled this way.

#49 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa said:

GTA Online is a free add-on to GTAV. Why would I change my view of GTAV because of a free add-on?

It's not an addon. It wasn't ready at launch.

Honestly, the spin you guys try to put on this shit.

It's an add-on. Was it there when the game released on the disk with the game? No, okay then. Only spinning being done here is by you.

#50 Posted by lundy86_4 (43010 posts) -

@Cranler said:

@seanmcloughlin said:

Because R* are smart and released the Online after so its mediocrity wouldnt bring down the score of the core main game

So sp alone is worth a good score but giving the buyer a whole other mode should hurt the score? Nice logic!

Name me some games that have great mp and sp in one package. Most games that have a solid sp , have a weak mp(and vice versa). Any reviewer with half a brain takes this into consideration when scoring.

Otherwise games like TLOU, Tombraider, FC 3 would have much lower scores.

So, you're saying as a complete package, that the reviewers should ignore a substandard MP mode, and rate solely on the SP? As for those games mentioned, we don't know if the MP components factored into those scores, heavily.