I played Mafia 1 and 2. Both of those games had cities that you could drive around in, but I wouldn't really describe them as "Open World" the same way that something like GTA or Assassin's Creed is "Open World".
Mafia games are more like L.A. Noire - the world is there for immersion and ambiance, but there's nothing to do in it. And that's ok! That's the reason why you have to drive to all of your missions without skipping. I don't really care if the world isn't full of quests - if I'm playing Assassin's Creed I usually skip 75% of the boring side quests anyway.
Having basic, dated shooter mechanics is also not a bad thing if you're playing a game for story and immersion. Mafia 1's shooting mechanics are almost unplayable by today's standards. Mafia 2 had pretty basic shooting. Spec Ops: The Line had an incredible ambiance and story, but pretty basic shooting. L.A. Noire's shooting was bad... but if you're looking for story and immersion, all of these games were excellent!
Mafia 2 was a completely unique experience - I don't think I've ever been that immersed in a world before. It's a shame that some of the main story missions in Mafia 3 sound repetitive (that's a pretty big strike against it), but I'm probably still going to buy.
@rebfaction Well fortunately for you this video can tell you everything you would need to know about the different aspects of the game. It sounds, based on your preferences, that you would like it! It's tough to put a single number on a game. I care a lot about story (even in shooters), so for me a 6 is probably accurate.
Tom McShea's arbitrary and selective logic continues.
It's really annoying when a game comes out that I want to read a review for, and I discover that it has been reviewed by McShea. Unlike some people in the comments section, I actually really appreciate the rest of GameSpot's reviewers... I think Tom just feels a need to show that he is different and contrarian, and GameSpot's editorial standards suffer for it.
I think I've finally put my finger on what bothers me about McShea's reviews.
He has strong opinions about particular games... that's totally fine. So do I! Nothing wrong with praising or trashing a game that you feel strongly about.
My ultimate goal when reading these reviews isn't to try to find someone who agrees or disagrees with me. My goal is to figure out if *I*, myself, would like the game that is being reviewed (to decide if I should buy it).
I can't figure that out with Tom's reviews! His opinions seem so fickle that I have no baseline that I can use to figure out if I'll like the game.
marmotzero's comments