Vice City or San Andreas which one do you like better?

This one's easy to answer. My answer will always be San Andreas (not the movie mind you) because the main character can swim and can't die asap when he hits the water. Vice City, for a game that has lots of boats and most of the times, the mission involve taking boats and the problem is, as soon as you hit the water, you die on the spot and that was a huge pain in the ass!

San Andreas all the freaking way!

Vice City for atmosphere and how it nails its setting. San Andreas for gameplay.

Vice City just hit it out of the park with its soundtrack and influence from movies that carry that 80s miami vibe. It's still my favourite GTA game to this day.San Andreas has a lot more to do with driving schools, flying schools, diving, there are a lot more side activities... and overall it controls better.

They both suck imo but vice city is slightly better for free roam.

i dont know why these games are highly praised as they have some of the worst gameplay mechanics including driving and shooting. even hand to hand combat just suck.

lot of kids play vice city just to free roam around. when i was kid. i played vice city with some cheatcodes to roam around. thats only fun i had.

@ghosts4ever:

So what's your thoughts on GTA4/RDR/GTA5/RDR2?

vice city

Never liked them. Feel clunky to play. Civilians dying in funny ways when you run them over with cars can only be fun for a couple hours. But it's more fun to play them that way, since the missions are often a drag or very annoying.

I vastly prefer GTA1, 2 and Chinatown Wars over the 3D GTAs.

Vice City for me edges out San Andreas.

I probably would never want to play San Andreas again, even though I had fun with it. Way too big, and quite a few filler missions and lots of painful driving and flying in the middle of nowhere.

San Andreas improved the controls and camera alot, so it wins.

Haven't played Vice City since 2011 and even then the shooting and camera felt terrible, might feel unplayable now.

Both were great but the setting in vice city nicks it for me. I recently played San Andreas and forgot the size and scale of the map.

Vice City for me. I just really enjoyed the whole 80’s setting and theme much more.

Vice City for the story, setting, soundtrack. I f*cking love the 80s Miami beach setting. San Andreas is great too though. It had a lot of gameplay improvements, some memorable characters and a great soundtrack.

@my_user_name: "might feel unplayable now"

Yeah it's outdated. But then again, GTA4/5 combat controls suck too.

vice city by a country mile

GTA San Andreas was ahead of its time with the gym mini games and getting fat if you didn't work out. It really made you think about things you wouldn't in a GTA game.

Gameplay and overall wise San Andreas, but it cannot touch the setting and the characterization of Vice City.

Loved both, but have to go with San Andreas. Loved the story, the characters and the varied environments.

see i'd argue those were bad things. sa was stuffed full of that kind of filler. and the story had to be stretched wafer thin to make room for all the filler. it was a necessary evolutionary step for the series, and good if you wanted a jack of all trades master of none sandbox to dick about in, but as a cohesive, authentic experience vice city murders it

That's tough... VC had a killer soundtrack, but SA was the better gam IMO.

This gets asked alot.

Vice City expands GTAIII without being bloated, It's map size and campaign pacing is perfect, along with arguably the most memorable homage to the 80''s in all media.

San Andreas was competitively bloated, be is map size, campaign length or unnecessary mechanics.

Also the story outline is basically the same as Vice City, but very obvious, can tell as soon as they start harping on about the old times loyalty exactly what is going to happen.

Having Miami Vice side-kick dude betray you was more subtle, Rosenberg, who's basically Fredo and seems like an asshole, sticks with psycho man. It subverts the game like The Last Jedi, but more bettereryer.

They aren't some Shakespearean masterpeice, but it's something you pick up on.

GTA4 stripped back all the nonsense of SA, but created it own set of problems by losing a lot of the simplistic arcade like nature of the series, trying to come across as some gritty movie, and continuing with boring ass side actives.

GTAIII and Vice City and Chinatown Wars were the peak of the series imo.

SA and GTA4 being the low.

Saints Row 2/3 are basically modern day GTA III/VC with more advanced mechanics retaining that simplistic arcade fun, pretty much designed for people who liked those original games.

RDR2 looks to be by far best rockstar open world game. thats all i say. will play it on PC next month.

RDR1 was ok just for western setting,

GTA4 and 5 absolutely suck. like any other GTA.

Vice City. I just love everything about the 80s even though I was born in 91.

San Andreas is good too.

Neither.

I liked Vice City.

San Andreas as you had so much to do. I loved Vice City, specially the music, but when SA came out, it made VC look so small with very little in it.

San Andreas because of the scale and amount of things to do. I do prefer the setting of Vice City but it doesn't have the same wow factor. The perfect GTA VI would have the setting and soundtrack of Vice City with the scale and variety of SA.

San Andreas. The camera control alone makes it better to play. A world five times bigger was amazing in a time before games were truly gigantic like today's but also not bursting with fetch quests and chores. Nearly everything in SA was fun to do.

Considering only a 2 year gap, the additions + improvements are nuts. That doesn't happen anymore. A 2019 sequel to a 2017 game will not be that level of galactic leap (I'd happily be proven wrong here, obviously games take longer to make now). To close my rambling, San Andreas was and is awesome.

But no station touches V Rock.

San Andreas for the content and all the things you can do in the game but Vice City has the better atmosphere for sure.