The problem with games like GTA IV and Diablo 3 and even Elder Scrolls, apart from the few flaws they do have is the people that play them. Because most of the time, those people look forward to those games because of their predecessors, they almost expect a same version of that game they love, but better..and it's never often the case and shouldn't be.

I played all the GTA's from 3 till IV and IV is probably my favorite of the series so far. IV took out some of the stuff that worked well for the series, like the in depth customization and added in great physics, interesting mini-games and awesome graphics. The story was just as good, because the story fit the game and it worked well being dark because that was the theme of the game when it came to the story.

As long as they add new things, or improve on a few old things..they don't have to include and improve upon everything the games before it had, to be good. When it comes to things like this, I seem to be in the party that always enjoys the newest game because I don't expect it to be like the games before it.

i love the GTA series. GTA 4 was alright, but i still think GTA 3, GTA Vice City, and GTA San Andreas were the best.

i really loved red dead redemption but i play on the xbox 360
game made me cry- only other game that did that was lost odyssey
and i love max payne
i had waaay too much trouble with the driving in GTA4
but i will buy GTA5
for the most part rockstars games are indeed quality

on my list of my most fav games of all times red dead is in the top 5
oblivion and fallout 3 being the top two

{dragons dogma is number 3 now}

I really enjoyed L.A Noire's driving AI. I wish that in real life, you could simply honk, and the car would get over into the right lane.

I don't think Assassin's Creed has been ruined. I haven't bought every installment, but I've been able to borrow them all and each one kept me playing for 40 hours or more trying to do and see every single thing in the game, twice.

I think a comparison between GTA III and IV would be more appropriate that with SA or VC.

3 and 4 were where they changed the game, while the ones in between were improvements on 3. SA should be compared with VI. (though it'll probably be more comparable to V since it takes place in Los Santos.)

Rockstar keeps making the same damn game over and over with little difference. I'm sick of the Grand Theft Auto franchise they don't try to do anything even a little different. It's stagnant.

Grand Theft Auto III and IV weren't different?

What about LA Noire and RDR?

I wish they'd bring the latter to PCs though.

In terms of gameplay, sure. But the gameplay is already solid enough and as long as they keep telling interesting stories, there won't be much of a problem.

What would you consider as "different"? I liked the improvements from 3 to 4. The graphics, the physics engine, everything.

Even simply running people over was wonderfully entertaining because of the way they reacted, and would fly all over the place. In the older ones, they would just flatten.

That's just one tiny aspect. There are so many improvements. The friend system could have been implemented better, but I liked the concept as it added an extra layer to the game itself, and made those characters deeper.

I like the improvements introduced in each game. It's not the same game. It's the same formula, yes, but there are always some improvements. It doesn't need to stray away from this, that's what makes GTA fun.

The first game didn't even have much a story, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du__yXzkkBg. They keep the core gameplay the same for a reason, it works. (though they refine it with each game)

What do you mean? Every single game had a different story and location. Do you want a whole new engine and whatnot? I'd say the one they have right now is perfect.

If they were a little more interested in quality the controls on Red Dead Redemption wouldn't have felt so horrible. They need to take lessons in how to implement smooth and responsive controls.

I still enjoy the Assassins Creed series. Prehaps they've made releases too close together, but they've managed to create quality games that offer enjoyable plots and gameplay. I just take my time between AC games so they dont get too repetative.

Rockstar is a good developer too though. LA Noire is a geeat game and Red Dead was good too. I honestly never liked GTA4 though. It's been so long since I've played it but I remember the story wasn't very interesting to me and I grew bored of the game rather quickly.

If they valued quality at all they wouldn't have ported a steaming pile of crap over to PC called GTA4, and they'd learn how to design suitable shooter combat. Hands down the most overrated developer out there.

make the stories more interactive and have choices that mean something in the games rather than just a linear story that plays out the same way

Some gams are linear, and will always be linear. GTA focuses more on the world and story then the story choices. Either accept it, or it's not your type of game.

GTA IV was a turd. V better deliver.

I liked GTA 4, once you added the Episodes from Liberty City, it made it even better, it didn't quite have the replayability of San Andreas, which i played alot more, but it's still a good game imo, and i'm looking forward to V