Why were there basically zero GTA clones that tried to copy the so-called 2D GTA games? I get that making something like Driver was more of a no-brainer with the consoles of the late 90's, but surely there was still a market for something with GTA1's arcadey look and feel?
>>12693847There were some for the ds and digital stores in the 7th and 8th gen
3D development was already kicking off. GTA would be one of the last relevant 2D titles for many years (not counting Nintendo handhelds, and even then).
Not interesting.Same reason why GTA itself was not a massive hit until it went 3D. Get real.
Tank controls and no ability to actually see where you're driving. No one actually enjoys driving in those games
>>12693851>3D development was already kicking off.Pretty much this. GTA3 was released barely two years later.
>>12693847There was Payback for the Amiga as far as clones go. Beyond that, a few kindaaa similar games (some even on handhelds), but mostly focusing on driving and without all the violence, which was probably seen as a hard to sell/publish? Dunno. In terms of gritty games with a similar perspective, I also recall Syndicate Wars, but you could actually freely rotate the camera in that one and apparently it was being developed prior to the first GTA, so calling it a clone would be doing it a disservice.
>>12693872Syndicate Wars was a sequel, too. It's also not particularly similar to GTA, Smash TV is closer to GTA than Syndicate ever was.
>>12693850I'm aware of things like Retro City Rampage that came out over a decade after the 2D GTA's stopped being relevant, what I'm asking is why more games in its style didn't come out at the time. GTA III had many clones within its own console generation, but as far as I know GTA was the only one doing top-down city roaming gameplay during the PS1 era. And it's not like GTA1 was a sleeper hit; I've seen many people fondly reminisce about playing it, though most of them were brits now that I think about it so maybe it was just a local hit.
>>12693914Yeah, I don't know, dude. I think you might just have the wrong idea of the series success. It's relative because gta 1 and 2 were obviously good enough to justify sequels but gta3 really was just an industry game changer.Pic is of a DOS turn based rpg that features criminal activities in a top down open world.
If you broaden your scope a little bit, I remember thinking the free roaming vehicular action of GTA2 felt comfortable next to my interest in the helicopter strike games.
>>12693847Because from the normies' perspective, GTA started at 3.
>>12693951GTA 1 & 2 were very successful games. The fact that 3 and onwards were even more successful doesn't diminish 1 & 2's success. t. Bought 1 and 2 at release
>>12693896You could ride a car though and unless memory serves me wrong, run over pedestrians? But either way, yeah it's a bit of a stretch.PS. And yes, I know it was a sequel. To be fair I didn't even love it all that much as a kid, much preferred the pixelated look of the first one. Still not a half bad game. Shame about what happened to Bullfrog.
>>12694101Great. You've managed to reiterate the same points i made with the same relativity. Thanks for your support.
>>12693863No reason that controls and movement can't be improved for a game of this kind. The perspective still kinda hamstrings you a bit on fast driving, but even the first game would actually zoom the camera out for you when you got up to speed. I think it just needed to be a little more accommodating on that part.>>12693872>Syndicate WarsThat's a 3D development on the prior isometric squad tactics game Syndicate. Fucking excellent and underappreciated game, even if it has a number of rough edges, but it's not really much like GTA in gameplay, structure, or player input.>>12693914>And it's not like GTA1 was a sleeper hitOh, absolutely not, GTA1 and GTA2 were fairly big hits for their time, and kids on the playground would talk about them fairly often. Best I could tell from then, general consensus was that they were good and fun games worth playing, and I found the same when I first tried it out.And I'd come back to it as well. I remember one day, still a kid, GTA3 had been out for a year or so (and that was one of my favorites), but I was feeling like, damn, I just really wanted to play GTA1. So I went down to the nearby store, bought a bag of potato chips (dill & chives), and a can of orange soda, and then just enjoyed them while having fun playing the game.
>>12694104>You could ride a car though and unless memory serves me wrong, run over pedestrians?Yes, but it was limited. Normal cars were essentially stuck on a kind of track, driving on the right side of the road, at a fixed speed, stopping automatically at street crossings if there were people on it, and pulling over by the side of the road if stopped.They were essentially glorified Johnny Cabs, and that fits the dystopian sci-fi setting. You COULD run people over, or get run over (but not at street crossings), so if someone flees out into the road, or crosses traffic to get at you, they could be hit, though this isn't particularly damaging, and is more an inconvenience.However, there are two other kinds of vehicles. The first is the flying cars, these are special versions of any given normal car, only they move faster and fly high up in the air so they can just about ignore all terrain without problem, and you can issue movement with the mouse like you can when you're character is walking. These are critical for beating some missions, and are sometimes an absolute bitch when the game uses them against you. Usually it's a squad of guys with miniguns or lasers, but in a late mission you will face a few where the driver throws nuclear hand grenades at you (and he doesn't run out until you're dead or he blows himself up, the latter being pretty likely).The second is the tank, which is a larger armored vehicle with a missile battery turret. It isn't stuck to roads, can tolerate a LOT of damage, and has infinite seeking missiles, though it's pretty slow. I believe you CAN run people over with it, but it's difficult to do because they either flee or keep their distance.(The two others next to it here are armored, but they are cars, they can be flying, but are usually stuck to the road).tl;dr you don't get that same violent glory of instakilling someone by hitting them with a taxi at 100mph (there's other violent glory instead).
>>12694148Even road cars were useful, I remember a couple of missions where you needed one to go past a gate (gates didn't open for pedestrians).
>>12694158Oh, they were, hell, you could even use them for drive-bys (and enemies will drive-by you), but you couldn't use them for good old fashioned vehicular homicide.
>>12693847They're not as good as 3D GTA. That's it.
>>12694197Hard disagree, gta 2 takes a massive shit over 3 and VC, SA is the first good 3d gta
>>12693872Payback also got ported to GBA
>>12693872>PaybackIts sequel Payback II must be the best GTA clone in mobile
>>12694125Your post was muddled, it almost reads as if you are agreeing with him.
>>12693974yeah. I would say return fire sits nicely in that same early 3d top down genre
>>12693847GTA is a Motor City Patrol-like which is APB-adjacent
>>12694678This looks so much like Mass Destruction... or vice versa I guess. What's the best version between PSX, DOS and Saturn?
>>12694816Saturn needs every title thats left especially this one or got back to half an hours arcade ports
>>126941012 is better game tho
