Originally Posted by Transfurzz
Please let me hear your definition of free roam. :)
You can't really compare a third person shooter to an RPG. Whereas a RPG requires a lot more interaction with the enviroment. A third person shooter can get by easily in this aspect. All it needs is to have a believable and enjoyable enviroment. Interaction isn't a neccessity. An RPG has to have a solid quest structure, whereas a third person shooter only needs a linear albeit interesting storyline or goal to keep the action going. RPGs satsify those of us that crave for a totally new world and immersion. While third person shooters are there to just provide entertainment in the form of action. The scary thing about this ? Many RPGs are actually becoming nothing but third person shooters with an extremely linear storyline. Even worse, they take away the action and just implement a boring battle system. Unlike GTA, you get pent up in tiny areas with little to no content. Quests may be interesting but how far can you go till you hit that inevitable edge ? GTA requires a linear storyline to drive the player forward to new areas. While an RPG doing the same can fall well short of its expectations.
That in short, is actually a salute to Oblivion.
Thats just my two cents. Don't compare two genres with totally different aims.
Why don't you try upping the texture quality on something originally made for the PS2. :D A system that doesn't even have a GPU. 40 FPS ? Where have you been ? Its easy to run the game above that at 1024, a far higher resolution than what you see on your average TV. To be honest, I think Rockstar did a bang up job. In fact, lousy textures are definitely not their weakpoint. Tennis is probably the best looking game out for the 360 right now. ;)