There's no need to discuss the hype behind this game or its commercial success. We all know it was well received by the public, got great reviews and made Rockstar even richer.

So how does it play? Was it worth the wait? Should it have waited even longer? Maybe and absolutely.

The game does an admirable job of representing what is basically New York and having a sympathetic lead who kills, steals and double-crosses to survive. He doesn't like what he does, wishes he didn't have to do it, but in order to fulfill his objective, he has to do these things. (Note that the vast majority of people he kills, steals from and double-crosses aren't even worthy of being called scum.) The game also forces the player to make some hard choices which have long-lasting consequences. And of course, true to form for a GTA game, there's weapons, explosions, sex, car chases, gun fights and profanities aplenty.

Which leads me to the first of many letdowns for this game. The missions are so repetitive, so tedious, so monotonous, and so boring that it is literally impossible to truly differentiate one mission from the next. A good 50% of the game, probably more involves shooting endless waves of enemies, many of whom pop up in completely illogical places. It is very easy for one enemy to kill you in a matter of seconds after having done so well up to that point.

Which brings me to my next point: Mission failures. The system Rockstar put in place is by far the worst system in any AAA video game, and budget titles would do well to stay far from this as well. If you fail a mission, you must restart the mission entirely. From the beginning. Every single time. It doesn't matter if the mission is a single chase, a single shootout or if there is more than one part to it. (The final mission has five parts to it.) If something goes wrong, you start back at the beginning and you have to redo the entire thing all over again. There are no mid-mission checkpoints. This is completely inexcusable.  Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, so video games have had checkpoints in them for at least seven years now and probably longer than that. Please don't put in a comment about how I forgot about how X game had them in 199X. I am not interested, I am only using that particular game as an example. That's it. End of discussion.

And yet, when you do restart, you still lose EVERYTHING you used in the mission. Why is that? Why should I have to replenish everything I lost on something that didn't actually happen? I can't think of any game that does this, and I probably wouldn't want to play such a game, mainly because I prefer games that are fun. Is having to restock ammo and armor on a mission that didn't actually just happen fun? No. That's downtime, and downtime isn't fun, especially when it's needless downtime. And Rockstar isn't based in someone's garage. This is a very large company with a huge budget, so these amateurish design decisions are even more inexcusable.

Speaking of inexcusable design decisions that were antiquated long, long ago, let's discuss another aspect of gun fights. For some reason, when Niko is being shot at, his default speed, running or walking is the exact same speed as when nothing is going on. SWAT 3 came out almost NINE YEARS AGO, and that game had a dynamic speed change. In other words, if shots were fired, everyone sped up. Not Niko. No, he'll just wander around unless you actually hit the run button. Which also makes him run just as fast as though nothing is going on. Wouldn't someone who is trying to find cover so they don't get shot move faster than if they aren't in danger? If you'd like a more recent example of what Rockstar should have done, take a look at Mass Effect.

The driving mechanics also have a much higher learning curve than what it needs to be, especially with motorcycles and helicopters. Why Rockstar didn't take more time honing the controls and making them easier to pick up is anyone's guess. Same with ladders. I have a friend who will tap the Y button until his thumb is ready to break and even still Niko will not climb the ladder that is right in front of him. This is usually after swimming a ridiculous distance to it since the game doesn't allow the player to just suicide and spawn at the nearest hospital. No instead we have to swim ridiculously long distances. Talk about fun huh?

Which is about the same as can be said for multiplayer. You just walk or drive around the city. There is nothing to do. Nothing. No activities, no places to go, nothing. There are some missions that can be done but if you just want to free roam with a friend in multiplayer, that's ALL you get to do. A drop-in, drop-out co-op in the story mode would've been much, much better.

Oh, yeah, the story. Well what little there is isn't too bad, when the game actually allows you to see it. Most of the time it's too busy bogging you down with those same repetitive missions I talked about earlier where it always goes the exact same way - a deal that shouldn't have any problems where Niko is just there "as insurance" turns into a battle ground with lots and lots of enemies, then just they're all dead, more spawn in the area that was just cleared, then the fight leads to a car/motorcycle chase which leads to a police chase, lather, rinse, repeat. Almost all of the missions have this exact same format. The only things that change are the goons' clothing and the SET of lines Niko yells out as he kills them (not the actual lines themselves.) So don't worry kids, if you heard him say something in a mission, he will say it again! And again....and again....and again.

And lastly, for some reason even though games have been doing this for years, GTA IV still allows objects that obstruct your view of the player to remain opaque. Every other high quality title I have ever seen that operates in 3rd person forces such obstructions to go transparent.

The characters Niko takes missions from and/or befriends are your stock cardboard cutouts but let's face it, no one plays a GTA game for the character study. That's why we have those....um....what're those things called, libraries have them....oh well. Anyway, the dialogue is at times rather humorous, especially when Niko is hanging around Brucie. I think we've all known a Brucie at some point in our lives, so to see Niko indirectly poke fun at these guys is a treat. And as usual, GTA IV satirizes many aspects of society and pop-culture that are just begging for it. Celebrities, radio-talk show hosts, gossip magazines, plenty of entertainment venues and the masses that support them all get the healthy shot of parody that has been coming to them for years.

With a whole lot more polish, mid-mission checkpoints and far less repetition, GTA IV would deserve the accolades and commercial success it has enjoyed as of late. As it stands, however, it is yet another proof that hype, a big name label and commercial success do not always mean a great game. It is a good game, but nothing more.
There's no need to discuss the hype behind this game or its commercial success. We all know it was well received by the public, got great reviews and made Rockstar even richer. So how does it play? Was it worth the wait? Should it have waited even longer? Maybe and absolutely. The game does an admirable job of representing what is basically New York and having a sympathetic lead who kills, steals and double-crosses to survive. He doesn't like what he does, wishes he didn't have to do it, but in order to fulfill his objective, he has to do these things. (Note that the vast majority of people he kills, steals from and double-crosses aren't even worthy of being called scum. ) The game also forces the player to make some hard choices which have long-lasting consequences. And of course, true to form for a GTA game, there's weapons, explosions, sex, car chases, gun fights and profanities aplenty. Which leads me to the first of many letdowns for this game. The missions are so repetitive, so tedious, so monotonous, and so boring that it is literally impossible to truly differentiate one mission from the next. A good 50% of the game, probably more involves shooting endless waves of enemies, many of whom pop up in completely illogical places. It is very easy for one enemy to kill you in a matter of seconds after having done so well up to that point. Which brings me to my next point: Mission failures. The system Rockstar put in place is by far the worst system in any AAA video game, and budget titles would do well to stay far from this as well. If you fail a mission, you must restart the mission entirely. From the beginning. Every single time. It doesn't matter if the mission is a single chase, a single shootout or if there is more than one part to it. (The final mission has five parts to it. ) If something goes wrong, you start back at the beginning and you have to redo the entire thing all over again. There are no mid-mission checkpoints. This is completely inexcusable. Operation Flashpoint came out in 2001, so video games have had checkpoints in them for at least seven years now and probably longer than that. Please don't put in a comment about how I forgot about how X game had them in 199X. I am not interested, I am only using that particular game as an example. That's it. End of discussion. And yet, when you do restart, you still lose EVERYTHING you used in the mission. Why is that? Why should I have to replenish everything I lost on something that didn't actually happen? I can't think of any game that does this, and I probably wouldn't want to play such a game, mainly because I prefer games that are fun. Is having to restock ammo and armor on a mission that didn't actually just happen fun? No. That's downtime, and downtime isn't fun, especially when it's needless downtime. And Rockstar isn't based in someone's garage. This is a very large company with a huge budget, so these amateurish design decisions are even more inexcusable. Speaking of inexcusable design decisions that were antiquated long, long ago, let's discuss another aspect of gun fights. For some reason, when Niko is being shot at, his default speed, running or walking is the exact same speed as when nothing is going on. SWAT 3 came out almost NINE YEARS AGO, and that game had a dynamic speed change. In other words, if shots were fired, everyone sped up. Not Niko. No, he'll just wander around unless you actually hit the run button. Which also makes him run just as fast as though nothing is going on. Wouldn't someone who is trying to find cover so they don't get shot move faster than if they aren't in danger? If you'd like a more recent example of what Rockstar should have done, take a look at Mass Effect. The driving mechanics also have a much higher learning curve than what it needs to be, especially with motorcycles and helicopters. Why Rockstar didn't take more time honing the controls and making them easier to pick up is anyone's guess. Same with ladders. I have a friend who will tap the Y button until his thumb is ready to break and even still Niko will not climb the ladder that is right in front of him. This is usually after swimming a ridiculous distance to it since the game doesn't allow the player to just suicide and spawn at the nearest hospital. No instead we have to swim ridiculously long distances. Talk about fun huh? Which is about the same as can be said for multiplayer. You just walk or drive around the city. There is nothing to do. Nothing. No activities, no places to go, nothing. There are some missions that can be done but if you just want to free roam with a friend in multiplayer, that's ALL you get to do. A drop-in, drop-out co-op in the story mode would've been much, much better. Oh, yeah, the story. Well what little there is isn't too bad, when the game actually allows you to see it. Most of the time it's too busy bogging you down with those same repetitive missions I talked about earlier where it always goes the exact same way - a deal that shouldn't have any problems where Niko is just there "as insurance" turns into a battle ground with lots and lots of enemies, then just they're all dead, more spawn in the area that was just cleared, then the fight leads to a car/motorcycle chase which leads to a police chase, lather, rinse, repeat. Almost all of the missions have this exact same format. The only things that change are the goons' clothing and the SET of lines Niko yells out as he kills them (not the actual lines themselves. ) So don't worry kids, if you heard him say something in a mission, he will say it again! And again.... and again.... and again. And lastly, for some reason even though games have been doing this for years, GTA IV still allows objects that obstruct your view of the player to remain opaque. Every other high quality title I have ever seen that operates in 3rd person forces such obstructions to go transparent. The characters Niko takes missions from and/or befriends are your stock cardboard cutouts but let's face it, no one plays a GTA game for the character study. That's why we have those.... um.... what're those things called, libraries have them.... oh well. Anyway, the dialogue is at times rather humorous, especially when Niko is hanging around Brucie. I think we've all known a Brucie at some point in our lives, so to see Niko indirectly poke fun at these guys is a treat. And as usual, GTA IV satirizes many aspects of society and pop-culture that are just begging for it. Celebrities, radio-talk show hosts, gossip magazines, plenty of entertainment venues and the masses that support them all get the healthy shot of parody that has been coming to them for years. With a whole lot more polish, mid-mission checkpoints and far less repetition, GTA IV would deserve the accolades and commercial success it has enjoyed as of late. As it stands, however, it is yet another proof that hype, a big name label and commercial success do not always mean a great game. It is a good game, but nothing more.